"All that and I still firmly believe that the only reason USENET hasn't been shut down is because its too good a source of leads for catching Child Abusers/Child Pornographers"
That's a pretty narrow view of what Usenet is, considering that it's a lot more than just porn,warez, and movies.
Over the years, it's been a great repository of information, and the exchange thereof.
Saying that it's only around to catch kiddy porn purveyors, is at the very least, uninformed.
Without checking, I doubt that even if you subscribe to Giganews (and not with an ISP that partners with Giganews or any other usenet provider), you'll get anything close to a 58 days retention. I think 30 days is a more accurate average of the retention you'll get for most binary groups.
2. Retention
With the world's longest newsgroup binary retention of 90 days and text retention of 1214 days, you'll get all the articles you're looking for without having to camp out in your favorite groups.
Well, that's entirely great that you've found two great sites for searching. Drop me an email, if you don't mind sharing. In my experience, I've only found one (and yeah, I neglected to mention NZB's in my posting, quite by accident). I use Unison and it's a great program that handles NZB's and I don't have to download headers to use them. I just mentioned downloading headers, for those unable to find NZB's (or use them for that matter) and what it takes to do things the "old fashioned way."
I agee with most of what you have to say...
For those who don't know, Usenet is a distributed, decentralized, threaded messaging network which predates the Internet. There are problems with how it is designed, but keep in mind that it was set up in the mid-70's and back then if you were on the network, you were probably supposed to be there, eventally helped improve it, and for the most part were accountable.
I disagree that there are problems with its' design, in that, it's lasted this long, and from everything I know about it (dating back to the late 80's) people have always been proclaiming it's death or that so and so is going to eventually pull the plug on it. The fact that it's decentralized, and anyone with a spare computer could set up a server to, at the very least "repeat" what's carried by larger servers, is the very thing that will keep it running long after web2.0 dies a horrible death when "the next big thing" comes along.
I recently discovered.nzb files this year and if anything, with more newsreaders being able to hand nzb's, I feel like it will become easier for users in general to participate in Usenet, and we'll see an expansion in the number of people on there.
Comcast is partnered with Giganews, does that make it ok to download TV shows then?;)
Seriously though, the real difference between the two (at least when it comes to finding movies and other *AA offensive material) is the ease (or lack thereof) with which it can be found by the average Joe.
Having been on Usenet for some time, finding one episode out of the many legit postings, spam, incomplete files, bad encodings, etc... is a real hassle and PITA. Try finding a posting that was left say... 58 days ago, when dealing with large files (like a 4.6 GB movie in multiple parts) and the number of headers you have to download and sort becomes quite a time consuming chore. In my experience, I have only found 2 *good* ways of finding content easily on Usenet. 1 is a serach engine in the.info realm, and (when I used windows) a program called "grabit" which offered integrated search that apparently is maintained by the software creators (i.e. no header download), but is only functional for a subscription fee.
With BT, there's plenty of sites out there that offer well indexed, and decently maintained search listings for torrents so that the average user (savvy enough to install a BT client and run it anyways) can find and download pretty much anything on a whim.
What makes usenet nice (and a peripheral threat to *AA), is fast downloads, and retention. A torrent might die off or significantly drop in speed/peers/seeds after 3-7 days, stuff on usenet (depending on your provider) has retention of 70 days+, and you're only limited to your download cap on your account (unless you know of a free provider). What makes it bad, is the lack of an easy reliable search mechanism.
The MPAA partnering with GUBA, seems to me, a way for the MPAA to put a spin on usenet akin to putting up a 2 ft fence to keep out an 8ft gorilla.
I disagree with this comparison completely. At least how it's being judged and what it's being called. I think the real question here is,
"who is better at critical thinking?" The bloggers, or high school kids with little life experience under their belt?
To say this is a test of writing, is just sick. Writing requires passion, inspiration, and thought. After visiting the site and seeing what exactly the question/comment that the "contestants" were required to write about, I didn't even want to bother looking at any of the submissions.
Another big difference, is that the SAT test takers are under pressure to perform for their educational future, whereas the "bloggers" don't really have anything riding on it.
I like to fancy myself a writer, but I know i'm not consistant with it. I really only write when I'm inspired to do so, and usually it's to vent whatever crappy experience I'm going through or as a release valve to the craziness that goes on in my head from time to time.
That's a far cry from asking my opinion in regards to a certain subject, then timing me as to how fast I can composite an opinion and express it in writing.
If this were to be an accurate accounting of flat out writing skill and the use of the english language, a better test would be to have the "contestants" write out a technical manual, and judge it on who could clearly and best explain how to setup your widget du jour.
I like the game. It's entertaining. The control mechanism sucks IMO. My 4 year old son wanted it, so we went and got it. It would be nice if there were options to change flight control.
The thing that bothers me about this, is his attitude of worrying about the PR fallout in other parts of the world.
FTFA: "If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."
They are supposed to be protecting us from our enemies, not trying to be accountable to them or any other country with an opinion. THEY SHOULD BE ACCOUNTABLE TO US (the citizens).
Another thing that irritates me, is that regardless of which side of the law we are on, being a test subject should be a strict violation of our civil rights. If they test this weapon and American civilians die what then? If anything why not test these new weapons in a battlefield where you're trying to wound/maim/kill the enemy, rather than suppress/arrest/dispurse them?
This would also seem to be pretty much unavoidable (for those of you that would say "don't attend xyz, and you don't have anything to worry about"), if you were to attend a rally of some kind, would they notify you that they are testing this, or just blast the crowd with it? The only way to avoid being a test subject would be to avoid any kind of public speech/event that has potential for becoming heated, at which point you might as well never again leave the house, write a letter to the editor of your local paper, or post your opinion publicly on your favorite forums.
As a matter of fact, I think any kind of crowd control device of this nature should be strictly outlawed for use in the united states. Something like this gives the government waaaaaay too much power, in the event that we the people ever decided to oust the current representation and start again.
I agree with you on this, with the exception that iSight/iChat needs to allow access to adjusting the camera's settings (white balance, brightness, contrast, etc) like other cameras allow.
Sheesh... I'd hate to work where you work, if that's your opinion of the owner of your company. Do you normally work for the opposition, or are you more of a mercenary type, doing it for the highest bidder?
Is it the "owners" or the "workers" part of the corporation that get the benefits?
Is it the "owners" or the "workers" part of the population that pay the price?
Well, I'd have to ask the obvious questions.... Are we talking about forced labor camps, or are "workers" getting paid for the work they do?
Are "workers" being forced to work for these greedy "owners?"
By "pay the price", do you mean purchasing materials, services, and products that people want/need at a rate that people are willing to pay/make it worthwhile to produce? Or were you referring to those guys that dragged me to Wal-mart the other day and forced me to buy things at gunpoint?
So don't tell me it's OK for corporations to suck the marrow out of the rest of society because they are made up of people. It's a case of the few getting absurdly rich at the cost off the many, there's no way to get around that fact.
I'm sorry, I missed the part where the "few [that are] getting absurdly rich..." are forcing anyone to work for them at all. I fail to see how corporations are sucking the marrow out of society, when they are directly supported by and made up of the same society they are supposedly "sucking" from.
Average after-tax income gain, 1979-2000
Top 1% $576,400
Middle fifth $5,500
Bottom fifth $1,100
Small as it is though, there is a gain. I'm no economist, but I'd guess that with the exception of the bottom fifth (minimum wage employees?) that still beats inflation. Do you have a problem with people who provide jobs and have worked hard to build a strong business earning more than the rest of the people, or do you think that everyone should make the same amount of money regardless of what job they do?
Oh yeah, I'm curious to know....Exactly what point does one have too much money? I only ask, so that when you hit the ceiling maybe you'll pass your excess on to me.
I agree with the spirit of your post, but the one thing that people overlook in their "government+companies vs. the people" argument, is that companies are made up of people. I think the spirit of what companies do to protect their investments, is to help protect their money. Money which they use to pay their employees, who in turn, contribute to society.
I do, however, agree that these kinds of things suck, and feel that if I own a VHS tape or LP, I should be able to transfer them to whatever media I choose.... But by admitting that I have the ability to do so, also is an admission that I have the ability to still play the original media and am not locked out of it. Granted, I own an mp3 player, and think it would be cool to listen to those old unpublished B sides I have stored away on vinyl when I take the dog for a walk, or any media I own, that for whatever reason isn't considered profitable to some guy sitting in a tower. Artistry in any form needs to be preserved, regardless of popularity or profit. Admirers of "unprofitable" or "unpopular" art, in my opinion have a duty and right to preserve and protect art for future generations, when others won't do it.
To me, copy restrictions amount to nothing more than the censorship of art, and a slippery slope of allowing only a select few to choose what parts of our past carry on into the present. Remember this one thing: "History is written by the winners."
Apple has no problem reinforcing that view, either. Maybe they're just proud? Sure they are. But if it was only pride, I can't help but think they wouldn't spend so much time picking on the 95% of us who don't own a Mac.
I guess I can see that, but there's the flipside of that coin too. Having been a windows geek for such a long time, I would never have considered getting a mac, let alone touching one, on my own. The thought just had never ocurred to me because I was happy in my computing world, problems and all (not a slam, I promise) because when I didn't have anything to do, it gave me something to do.
Then, a friend of mine had purchased a powerbook out of the blue. She works for a company that has a full eterprise grad IT department, and not a one of the 5 or 6 techs that came around (college educated guys mind you) couldn't figure out how to configure the Airport(wireless) card (their very first gripe was "where's the right click?!?!" [amazing so many people rely so heavily on one button for so much, aren't trained pros supposed to know more than one way to get something done?]). So, she came to me. Now, at that point I'd never even read about OS X, but after 30 seconds I found the config interface. That one interaction changed my mind about PC's completely. The mac is Simple and effective. (sorry, just a bit off topic, but i'm getting there).
Now that I'm on the Apple side of the computing "fence" I get colleauges' scorn and MS fundamentalism about how "apple will never be [this or that]." If polled, I bet I'm not in the minority of Apple users that recieve this. I think it's perfectly fair and long overdue that Apple would proudly flaunt it's features over Windows', especially when in this PC centric culture, the one's you've described as "elitist" are really the ones on the receiving end of the scorn and have been for a while.
It's not the market share, though I do have to admit it would be difficult to be elitist with 95% of the market. It's the attitude. Mac users tend to act like their machines are better than the rest and that betterness somehow extends to them, personally. It's quite a lot what you see in high-end sports car owners. No, it doesn't always happen, but it's quite common amoung the mac users I've interacted with.
Same with Windows users (at least power users and up) and Linux users. It seems like the word "fanboi" gets thrown around mostly/only when we start talking about macs around here, but there's fanatacism in any OS camp. If you're meeting apple people that heap the scorn on you, then I'd suggest finding new friends.;)
All in all, for me, it's never been about who uses what to cause me to cast judgement about them (at least in a computing sense). It's always been about what works best for you. If it's Windows, great. If it's *nix, great. If it's OS X, great, let me show you some cool things I found when I switched that will make the transition easier.
Did Apple make either of those movies?
None of the terms "receptionst," "blue collar worker," or "businessman" mean the same thing as "relatively non-smart person."
If you thought "non-smart" and "common" were synonymous, and you're a Mac user, you're making my point.
Well, I can't think of any movie that apple has ever made. So perhaps my tounge in cheek remark came off a little smug. But since it was taken a little harshly let me elaborate (even though none of what I am about to say about movies has anything to do with apple producing a movie).
Most movies I've ever seen where a computer was used, used a Mac interface on PC type hardware.
In your three catagories of "office worker" you totally neglected your marketing/art departments as well as publishing houses which are a large portion of "Office" macintosh/apple users. May I ask, what kind of "blue collar" worker actually uses a windows based computer to produce art/media? Most of the systems I've ever heard about run on specially designed software that a minimal version of windows runs on, and the user never even has to interface with windows at all, let alone knows that windows is installed.
Perhaps you meant "white collar" workers instead. So what does a white collar worker do with their windows machine? MS Office style applications. That's about all that comes to mind, outside of whatever proprietary software that may be needed.
I think what makes the Apple vs. PC commercials so funny, is that not one person who has ever used windows can't nod their head in agreement with them from time to time. If you can't at least see the humor in them, then you take all of this too seriously. My Powerbook came in one box. So did the iMac. All I had to do was plug them in and input a little info. I can't claim the same thing for any dell laptop i've ever owned, or desktop machine i've ever purchased.
Macs are featured as being used by people smarter, hipper and better looking than you or me (well, me anyway). These people are elite. If Apple ever want's to be considered anything but elitist, they can start by showing ads of a receptionist using a Mac. Or is that just too... common?
No, I didn't confuse "non-smart" and "common," you combined then just fine. With what you have mentioned though, goes straight to the heart of marketing "creating a desire for something." So maybe the shills in their commercials are smarter looking, sexier, and hipper than the norm. But who dosen't want to be those things, if nothing more than to impress the opposite sex.
The point is, I guess, that it only seems elitist to use a mac because Apple has a smaller marketshare than the Commodity PC market so to those with a narrow mind and biased perceptions, someone who opts for a system outside of the status quo is "elitist".
Have a wonderful evening.
and today's college student is tomorrow's employee/manager/consultant/IT pro/whatever. The education sector is one area that it pays to be in. Whoever has the future users will eventually gain the marketshare.
Granted I realize that Apple had a lot of the education market in my generation (I'm 27 now) but, Apple has grown up a lot in terms of it's offerings and what it can do (as have I). They've come a long way from the II/? systems that I programed BASIC on when I was 6 and the System ? machines I used when I was 12.
PC's had/are having their day because they are/were a commodity that could be cheaply aquired and had mass appeal for so long (because of their inexpensiveness and Windows inital ease of use). Hell, it created an industry JUST TO SUPPORT THEM. Mom and Pop could open a store selling PC's and make money from sale one. That's not so with Apple. It's not ness a closed archetechture as much as it is a closed market. I own a powerbook and have switched my oranization (small business, 7 machines) to mac, but I"ll still hold my breath before tolling the deathknell of wintel.
But, Apple getting in good with the college students and such is definately an investment in their future. Especially with virtualization on the horizon. Not only that, but Apple offers dev tools with the OS, as well as guides etc on howto do develop software for the platform. Last time I looked at windows dev tools, they cost a small fortune (at least to a student) to purchase and work with.
What is this tripe, and why is slashdot giving wonkette traffic? What I see coming out of this is baseless whining that people with a job to do can't read a site denoncing the work they are doing. It makes sense to block those sites from our troops overseas. If they could be read, and the people at those sites (airamerica and alfranken for instance) would almost ramp up their propoganda against the war. It's a morale issue not a civil issue.
Another thing, this is the military we're talking about here. As a soldier you don't have specific civil rights when you're serving your tour of duty, as you signed them away when you joined. If they tell you to eat shit, you do it, and you do it with a smile. So please, let's quit crying censorship. These guys signed up for this. Let's call it censorship when they start drafting us, ok?
Also, my best friend is serving over in Iraq right now (as a marine), and I know for a fact he can get email out through places other than.mil. I'd like to see where she got her information and whether the soldiers that are sending out email had any other email accounts or just their.mil accounts. Beyond that, the fact that their email goes through filtering or some sort of monitoring makes sense. It's for security to make sure that there is no sensitive information leaked out that might compromise their mission(s). I'm sure that other forms of communication are monitored even further, but, I've chatted with my friend more than a few times since he's been over there on one popular IM service.
While there may be some filtering, I'd hardly decry it as censorship, since a thrifty soldier will always find a way to do whatever if it's that important to them personally. At any rate, I hardly see reading Wonkette as being high on anyone's priorities, especially people with guns living in tents.
I appreciate what you are saying. But ask this... Can you do it now? If so, freeze where you are. Keep it and don't change a thing. If they want your money (which they do) they will make it backwards compatible. If not, they will continue forward. If it dosen't work now, ask yourself why... Then ask them why. If you're funding them, they should cater to you. You are paying them.
You know, in a lot of ways it's comparable to how our government in the United States has evolved. At first (and should still) was meant to work for us, as employees of ours to ensure our continued freedoms and allowances of expression. The difference here my friend, is that we can choose to buy our computers. Unfortunately we were born into our leaders (for the most part). Since we can choose to use a computer or not, choose to use one that still does what it's original intent was. To do good work with a minimal effort. To communicate easily without tolls or restriction. The fact that "they" want to put TPM and DRM on hardware we are paying for basically says to me "This isn't for business, this is a toy." Which, since the lions share of the market is BUSINESS, only goes to show that someone has missed the boat, and instead of waiting for the next one they want to make the one they missed turn around and come back for them 2 metres from the pier. Sure, that's good for those that missed the boat, but what about those already on the boat (like us?).
If your computer works now with the software that you have now, and you can make money (honestly) with it now, why upgrade? The only thing making you get rid of what works and go for what's new, is the market that tries to entice you with boobies and flash, which won't help you get htings done any faster.
*note, I like boobies and flash... but on the internet I will not pay for them....
This is meant as somewhat tounge in cheek, but I've got some space and bandwidth to donate if other like minded people have the time, because I think that is a GREAT idea.
For the most part, as large a community as Slashdot is, the number of people around here that don't like where all this stuff is going (myself included), and the positions most of us are in to influence tech decisions of those around us, my suggestion to defeat this, is simply to not use it. Keep copies of your older software. Keep that old machine in decent shape and on a shelf somewhere. Keep some spare parts around. Pretty much anything you can do to create a hardware/software version freeze, so that when the shit really hits the fan on all of this, all you have to do is say "no thanks, I already have 'xyz' and it's working fine for me and i've made assurances that it will continue to work fine for me."
If you have a job at the moment, are you actually working or are they paying you to sit there and wait for the next round of upgrades?
In my mind, that's going to be the best way to defeat all of this stuff they are forcing on us. We need to take away their ability to force it on us.
I know wanting a faster processor is something we all want, but when I think about it, it hasn't really gotten all that much faster when you consider the OS's portion and how with almost every new speed bump, something is there to utilize that speed basically nullifying the benefeit it would have on your apps. So, why upgrade at all? If windows 3.11 had thte ability to deal with large amounts of RAM and large HDD's think of just how fast it would run on our modern processors.
Basically what I'm getting at, is, empower ourselves to take the upgrade cycle out of their hands, because when everyone says "i'm happy with what i've got" then they have no market. Same for the **AA's as someone mentioned. Take away their audience. Since we are pretty sure they are making a killing from digital music and video, just don't watch it on your computer or device etc. Get a DVD player now. Keep it and use it. When nobody is buying their newer crippled stuff, they are going to start whining that nobody uses their computers for media and it's hurting their wallets, and we can just point and say "you said the opposite of that 'x' years ago." It's definately not impossible to make these things happen on our terms. It's not even that hard. We just have to say we're not going to buy it or just be content working with what we have now.
in 10.3 and 10.4 Software Update automatically lets me know when and what updates are availible for all Apple software on my machine. If I decline and update of any kind for whatever reason, it lets me know again 12 hours (approx) later, untill I finally update. I wouldn't say your characterization is true of "most versions" of OS X. Can't say for versions or Linux. And why you're grouping OSX and Linux together anyways just seems silly.
With all due respect, have you ever tried running X (not tiger, I'm talking actual X) on your mac? I know it comes with the ability to netboot other machines into an X environment and use your favorite window manager. Maybe it's just my novice status that leads me to say this, but isnt' the only difference between Unix and Linux the cost and somewhat proprietary nature of Unix? I've only had my powerbook for almost a year now, and having used a few different flavors of linux, I like this version of Unix with OS X over it. You're right, it's not for everyone, but all your arguments in favor of linux seem like you're just one of those people who, (sorry) are a Linux fanboi. From everything I see, this is exactly the same as linux from an environment sense. I mean, please explain to a novice like me the difference between OS X and a Linux/BSD+"window manager du juor" environment, because I just really really don't see the difference. I don't mean to be a troll or to come off insulting, but other than the UI arguments, I don't get your point. It seems like from your description of your setup, you're jumping through hoops to do things that you could have already done from the start. Why did you buy an ibook in the first place?
Slashdot Mirror
"All that and I still firmly believe that the only reason USENET hasn't been shut down is because its too good a source of leads for catching Child Abusers/Child Pornographers"
That's a pretty narrow view of what Usenet is, considering that it's a lot more than just porn,warez, and movies.
Over the years, it's been a great repository of information, and the exchange thereof.
Saying that it's only around to catch kiddy porn purveyors, is at the very least, uninformed.
Without checking, I doubt that even if you subscribe to Giganews (and not with an ISP that partners with Giganews or any other usenet provider), you'll get anything close to a 58 days retention. I think 30 days is a more accurate average of the retention you'll get for most binary groups.
;)
hmmm.......
From here...
2. Retention With the world's longest newsgroup binary retention of 90 days and text retention of 1214 days, you'll get all the articles you're looking for without having to camp out in your favorite groups.
Check next time.
Well, that's entirely great that you've found two great sites for searching. Drop me an email, if you don't mind sharing. In my experience, I've only found one (and yeah, I neglected to mention NZB's in my posting, quite by accident). I use Unison and it's a great program that handles NZB's and I don't have to download headers to use them. I just mentioned downloading headers, for those unable to find NZB's (or use them for that matter) and what it takes to do things the "old fashioned way."
Cheers.
I agee with most of what you have to say... .nzb files this year and if anything, with more newsreaders being able to hand nzb's, I feel like it will become easier for users in general to participate in Usenet, and we'll see an expansion in the number of people on there.
For those who don't know, Usenet is a distributed, decentralized, threaded messaging network which predates the Internet. There are problems with how it is designed, but keep in mind that it was set up in the mid-70's and back then if you were on the network, you were probably supposed to be there, eventally helped improve it, and for the most part were accountable.
I disagree that there are problems with its' design, in that, it's lasted this long, and from everything I know about it (dating back to the late 80's) people have always been proclaiming it's death or that so and so is going to eventually pull the plug on it. The fact that it's decentralized, and anyone with a spare computer could set up a server to, at the very least "repeat" what's carried by larger servers, is the very thing that will keep it running long after web2.0 dies a horrible death when "the next big thing" comes along.
I recently discovered
Comcast is partnered with Giganews, does that make it ok to download TV shows then? ;)
.info realm, and (when I used windows) a program called "grabit" which offered integrated search that apparently is maintained by the software creators (i.e. no header download), but is only functional for a subscription fee.
Seriously though, the real difference between the two (at least when it comes to finding movies and other *AA offensive material) is the ease (or lack thereof) with which it can be found by the average Joe.
Having been on Usenet for some time, finding one episode out of the many legit postings, spam, incomplete files, bad encodings, etc... is a real hassle and PITA. Try finding a posting that was left say... 58 days ago, when dealing with large files (like a 4.6 GB movie in multiple parts) and the number of headers you have to download and sort becomes quite a time consuming chore. In my experience, I have only found 2 *good* ways of finding content easily on Usenet. 1 is a serach engine in the
With BT, there's plenty of sites out there that offer well indexed, and decently maintained search listings for torrents so that the average user (savvy enough to install a BT client and run it anyways) can find and download pretty much anything on a whim.
What makes usenet nice (and a peripheral threat to *AA), is fast downloads, and retention. A torrent might die off or significantly drop in speed/peers/seeds after 3-7 days, stuff on usenet (depending on your provider) has retention of 70 days+, and you're only limited to your download cap on your account (unless you know of a free provider). What makes it bad, is the lack of an easy reliable search mechanism.
The MPAA partnering with GUBA, seems to me, a way for the MPAA to put a spin on usenet akin to putting up a 2 ft fence to keep out an 8ft gorilla.
Yeah, in case of malfunction, they could all stand behind Cindy's oversized and extremely hard head.
I disagree with this comparison completely. At least how it's being judged and what it's being called. I think the real question here is,
"who is better at critical thinking?" The bloggers, or high school kids with little life experience under their belt?
To say this is a test of writing, is just sick. Writing requires passion, inspiration, and thought. After visiting the site and seeing what exactly the question/comment that the "contestants" were required to write about, I didn't even want to bother looking at any of the submissions.
Another big difference, is that the SAT test takers are under pressure to perform for their educational future, whereas the "bloggers" don't really have anything riding on it.
I like to fancy myself a writer, but I know i'm not consistant with it. I really only write when I'm inspired to do so, and usually it's to vent whatever crappy experience I'm going through or as a release valve to the craziness that goes on in my head from time to time.
That's a far cry from asking my opinion in regards to a certain subject, then timing me as to how fast I can composite an opinion and express it in writing.
If this were to be an accurate accounting of flat out writing skill and the use of the english language, a better test would be to have the "contestants" write out a technical manual, and judge it on who could clearly and best explain how to setup your widget du jour.
Follow them to their myspace page.
I like the game. It's entertaining. The control mechanism sucks IMO. My 4 year old son wanted it, so we went and got it. It would be nice if there were options to change flight control.
The thing that bothers me about this, is his attitude of worrying about the PR fallout in other parts of the world.
FTFA: "If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."
They are supposed to be protecting us from our enemies, not trying to be accountable to them or any other country with an opinion. THEY SHOULD BE ACCOUNTABLE TO US (the citizens).
Another thing that irritates me, is that regardless of which side of the law we are on, being a test subject should be a strict violation of our civil rights. If they test this weapon and American civilians die what then? If anything why not test these new weapons in a battlefield where you're trying to wound/maim/kill the enemy, rather than suppress/arrest/dispurse them?
This would also seem to be pretty much unavoidable (for those of you that would say "don't attend xyz, and you don't have anything to worry about"), if you were to attend a rally of some kind, would they notify you that they are testing this, or just blast the crowd with it? The only way to avoid being a test subject would be to avoid any kind of public speech/event that has potential for becoming heated, at which point you might as well never again leave the house, write a letter to the editor of your local paper, or post your opinion publicly on your favorite forums.
As a matter of fact, I think any kind of crowd control device of this nature should be strictly outlawed for use in the united states. Something like this gives the government waaaaaay too much power, in the event that we the people ever decided to oust the current representation and start again.
I agree with you on this, with the exception that iSight/iChat needs to allow access to adjusting the camera's settings (white balance, brightness, contrast, etc) like other cameras allow.
Sheesh... I'd hate to work where you work, if that's your opinion of the owner of your company. Do you normally work for the opposition, or are you more of a mercenary type, doing it for the highest bidder?
Is it the "owners" or the "workers" part of the corporation that get the benefits? Is it the "owners" or the "workers" part of the population that pay the price?
Well, I'd have to ask the obvious questions.... Are we talking about forced labor camps, or are "workers" getting paid for the work they do?
Are "workers" being forced to work for these greedy "owners?"
By "pay the price", do you mean purchasing materials, services, and products that people want/need at a rate that people are willing to pay/make it worthwhile to produce? Or were you referring to those guys that dragged me to Wal-mart the other day and forced me to buy things at gunpoint?
So don't tell me it's OK for corporations to suck the marrow out of the rest of society because they are made up of people. It's a case of the few getting absurdly rich at the cost off the many, there's no way to get around that fact.
I'm sorry, I missed the part where the "few [that are] getting absurdly rich..." are forcing anyone to work for them at all. I fail to see how corporations are sucking the marrow out of society, when they are directly supported by and made up of the same society they are supposedly "sucking" from.
Average after-tax income gain, 1979-2000 Top 1% $576,400 Middle fifth $5,500 Bottom fifth $1,100
Small as it is though, there is a gain. I'm no economist, but I'd guess that with the exception of the bottom fifth (minimum wage employees?) that still beats inflation. Do you have a problem with people who provide jobs and have worked hard to build a strong business earning more than the rest of the people, or do you think that everyone should make the same amount of money regardless of what job they do?
Oh yeah, I'm curious to know....Exactly what point does one have too much money? I only ask, so that when you hit the ceiling maybe you'll pass your excess on to me.
Cheers.
I agree with the spirit of your post, but the one thing that people overlook in their "government+companies vs. the people" argument, is that companies are made up of people. I think the spirit of what companies do to protect their investments, is to help protect their money. Money which they use to pay their employees, who in turn, contribute to society.
I do, however, agree that these kinds of things suck, and feel that if I own a VHS tape or LP, I should be able to transfer them to whatever media I choose.... But by admitting that I have the ability to do so, also is an admission that I have the ability to still play the original media and am not locked out of it. Granted, I own an mp3 player, and think it would be cool to listen to those old unpublished B sides I have stored away on vinyl when I take the dog for a walk, or any media I own, that for whatever reason isn't considered profitable to some guy sitting in a tower. Artistry in any form needs to be preserved, regardless of popularity or profit. Admirers of "unprofitable" or "unpopular" art, in my opinion have a duty and right to preserve and protect art for future generations, when others won't do it.
To me, copy restrictions amount to nothing more than the censorship of art, and a slippery slope of allowing only a select few to choose what parts of our past carry on into the present. Remember this one thing: "History is written by the winners."
Apple has no problem reinforcing that view, either. Maybe they're just proud? Sure they are. But if it was only pride, I can't help but think they wouldn't spend so much time picking on the 95% of us who don't own a Mac. ;)
I guess I can see that, but there's the flipside of that coin too. Having been a windows geek for such a long time, I would never have considered getting a mac, let alone touching one, on my own. The thought just had never ocurred to me because I was happy in my computing world, problems and all (not a slam, I promise) because when I didn't have anything to do, it gave me something to do.
Then, a friend of mine had purchased a powerbook out of the blue. She works for a company that has a full eterprise grad IT department, and not a one of the 5 or 6 techs that came around (college educated guys mind you) couldn't figure out how to configure the Airport(wireless) card (their very first gripe was "where's the right click?!?!" [amazing so many people rely so heavily on one button for so much, aren't trained pros supposed to know more than one way to get something done?]). So, she came to me. Now, at that point I'd never even read about OS X, but after 30 seconds I found the config interface. That one interaction changed my mind about PC's completely. The mac is Simple and effective. (sorry, just a bit off topic, but i'm getting there).
Now that I'm on the Apple side of the computing "fence" I get colleauges' scorn and MS fundamentalism about how "apple will never be [this or that]." If polled, I bet I'm not in the minority of Apple users that recieve this. I think it's perfectly fair and long overdue that Apple would proudly flaunt it's features over Windows', especially when in this PC centric culture, the one's you've described as "elitist" are really the ones on the receiving end of the scorn and have been for a while.
It's not the market share, though I do have to admit it would be difficult to be elitist with 95% of the market. It's the attitude. Mac users tend to act like their machines are better than the rest and that betterness somehow extends to them, personally. It's quite a lot what you see in high-end sports car owners. No, it doesn't always happen, but it's quite common amoung the mac users I've interacted with.
Same with Windows users (at least power users and up) and Linux users. It seems like the word "fanboi" gets thrown around mostly/only when we start talking about macs around here, but there's fanatacism in any OS camp. If you're meeting apple people that heap the scorn on you, then I'd suggest finding new friends.
All in all, for me, it's never been about who uses what to cause me to cast judgement about them (at least in a computing sense). It's always been about what works best for you. If it's Windows, great. If it's *nix, great. If it's OS X, great, let me show you some cool things I found when I switched that will make the transition easier.
Did Apple make either of those movies? None of the terms "receptionst," "blue collar worker," or "businessman" mean the same thing as "relatively non-smart person." If you thought "non-smart" and "common" were synonymous, and you're a Mac user, you're making my point. Well, I can't think of any movie that apple has ever made. So perhaps my tounge in cheek remark came off a little smug. But since it was taken a little harshly let me elaborate (even though none of what I am about to say about movies has anything to do with apple producing a movie). Most movies I've ever seen where a computer was used, used a Mac interface on PC type hardware. In your three catagories of "office worker" you totally neglected your marketing/art departments as well as publishing houses which are a large portion of "Office" macintosh/apple users. May I ask, what kind of "blue collar" worker actually uses a windows based computer to produce art/media? Most of the systems I've ever heard about run on specially designed software that a minimal version of windows runs on, and the user never even has to interface with windows at all, let alone knows that windows is installed. Perhaps you meant "white collar" workers instead. So what does a white collar worker do with their windows machine? MS Office style applications. That's about all that comes to mind, outside of whatever proprietary software that may be needed. I think what makes the Apple vs. PC commercials so funny, is that not one person who has ever used windows can't nod their head in agreement with them from time to time. If you can't at least see the humor in them, then you take all of this too seriously. My Powerbook came in one box. So did the iMac. All I had to do was plug them in and input a little info. I can't claim the same thing for any dell laptop i've ever owned, or desktop machine i've ever purchased. Macs are featured as being used by people smarter, hipper and better looking than you or me (well, me anyway). These people are elite. If Apple ever want's to be considered anything but elitist, they can start by showing ads of a receptionist using a Mac. Or is that just too... common? No, I didn't confuse "non-smart" and "common," you combined then just fine. With what you have mentioned though, goes straight to the heart of marketing "creating a desire for something." So maybe the shills in their commercials are smarter looking, sexier, and hipper than the norm. But who dosen't want to be those things, if nothing more than to impress the opposite sex. The point is, I guess, that it only seems elitist to use a mac because Apple has a smaller marketshare than the Commodity PC market so to those with a narrow mind and biased perceptions, someone who opts for a system outside of the status quo is "elitist". Have a wonderful evening.
Uhh.. Apparently you haven't seen "The Ringer" or "Clerks 2" Both have macs being used by relatively non-smart people.
and today's college student is tomorrow's employee/manager/consultant/IT pro/whatever. The education sector is one area that it pays to be in. Whoever has the future users will eventually gain the marketshare.
Granted I realize that Apple had a lot of the education market in my generation (I'm 27 now) but, Apple has grown up a lot in terms of it's offerings and what it can do (as have I). They've come a long way from the II/? systems that I programed BASIC on when I was 6 and the System ? machines I used when I was 12.
PC's had/are having their day because they are/were a commodity that could be cheaply aquired and had mass appeal for so long (because of their inexpensiveness and Windows inital ease of use). Hell, it created an industry JUST TO SUPPORT THEM. Mom and Pop could open a store selling PC's and make money from sale one. That's not so with Apple. It's not ness a closed archetechture as much as it is a closed market.
I own a powerbook and have switched my oranization (small business, 7 machines) to mac, but I"ll still hold my breath before tolling the deathknell of wintel.
But, Apple getting in good with the college students and such is definately an investment in their future. Especially with virtualization on the horizon. Not only that, but Apple offers dev tools with the OS, as well as guides etc on howto do develop software for the platform. Last time I looked at windows dev tools, they cost a small fortune (at least to a student) to purchase and work with.
Isn't this like announcing "water passes through a screen door"?
I guess you don't want to buy my Polish submarine then?
What is this tripe, and why is slashdot giving wonkette traffic? What I see coming out of this is baseless whining that people with a job to do can't read a site denoncing the work they are doing. It makes sense to block those sites from our troops overseas. If they could be read, and the people at those sites (airamerica and alfranken for instance) would almost ramp up their propoganda against the war. It's a morale issue not a civil issue.
.mil. I'd like to see where she got her information and whether the soldiers that are sending out email had any other email accounts or just their .mil accounts. Beyond that, the fact that their email goes through filtering or some sort of monitoring makes sense. It's for security to make sure that there is no sensitive information leaked out that might compromise their mission(s).
Another thing, this is the military we're talking about here. As a soldier you don't have specific civil rights when you're serving your tour of duty, as you signed them away when you joined. If they tell you to eat shit, you do it, and you do it with a smile. So please, let's quit crying censorship. These guys signed up for this. Let's call it censorship when they start drafting us, ok?
Also, my best friend is serving over in Iraq right now (as a marine), and I know for a fact he can get email out through places other than
I'm sure that other forms of communication are monitored even further, but, I've chatted with my friend more than a few times since he's been over there on one popular IM service.
While there may be some filtering, I'd hardly decry it as censorship, since a thrifty soldier will always find a way to do whatever if it's that important to them personally. At any rate, I hardly see reading Wonkette as being high on anyone's priorities, especially people with guns living in tents.
I appreciate what you are saying. But ask this... Can you do it now? If so, freeze where you are. Keep it and don't change a thing. If they want your money (which they do) they will make it backwards compatible. If not, they will continue forward. If it dosen't work now, ask yourself why... Then ask them why. If you're funding them, they should cater to you. You are paying them. You know, in a lot of ways it's comparable to how our government in the United States has evolved. At first (and should still) was meant to work for us, as employees of ours to ensure our continued freedoms and allowances of expression. The difference here my friend, is that we can choose to buy our computers. Unfortunately we were born into our leaders (for the most part). Since we can choose to use a computer or not, choose to use one that still does what it's original intent was. To do good work with a minimal effort. To communicate easily without tolls or restriction. The fact that "they" want to put TPM and DRM on hardware we are paying for basically says to me "This isn't for business, this is a toy." Which, since the lions share of the market is BUSINESS, only goes to show that someone has missed the boat, and instead of waiting for the next one they want to make the one they missed turn around and come back for them 2 metres from the pier. Sure, that's good for those that missed the boat, but what about those already on the boat (like us?). If your computer works now with the software that you have now, and you can make money (honestly) with it now, why upgrade? The only thing making you get rid of what works and go for what's new, is the market that tries to entice you with boobies and flash, which won't help you get htings done any faster. *note, I like boobies and flash... but on the internet I will not pay for them....
This is meant as somewhat tounge in cheek, but I've got some space and bandwidth to donate if other like minded people have the time, because I think that is a GREAT idea.
For the most part, as large a community as Slashdot is, the number of people around here that don't like where all this stuff is going (myself included), and the positions most of us are in to influence tech decisions of those around us, my suggestion to defeat this, is simply to not use it. Keep copies of your older software. Keep that old machine in decent shape and on a shelf somewhere. Keep some spare parts around.
Pretty much anything you can do to create a hardware/software version freeze, so that when the shit really hits the fan on all of this, all you have to do is say "no thanks, I already have 'xyz' and it's working fine for me and i've made assurances that it will continue to work fine for me."
If you have a job at the moment, are you actually working or are they paying you to sit there and wait for the next round of upgrades?
In my mind, that's going to be the best way to defeat all of this stuff they are forcing on us. We need to take away their ability to force it on us.
I know wanting a faster processor is something we all want, but when I think about it, it hasn't really gotten all that much faster when you consider the OS's portion and how with almost every new speed bump, something is there to utilize that speed basically nullifying the benefeit it would have on your apps.
So, why upgrade at all? If windows 3.11 had thte ability to deal with large amounts of RAM and large HDD's think of just how fast it would run on our modern processors.
Basically what I'm getting at, is, empower ourselves to take the upgrade cycle out of their hands, because when everyone says "i'm happy with what i've got" then they have no market. Same for the **AA's as someone mentioned. Take away their audience. Since we are pretty sure they are making a killing from digital music and video, just don't watch it on your computer or device etc. Get a DVD player now. Keep it and use it. When nobody is buying their newer crippled stuff, they are going to start whining that nobody uses their computers for media and it's hurting their wallets, and we can just point and say "you said the opposite of that 'x' years ago."
It's definately not impossible to make these things happen on our terms. It's not even that hard. We just have to say we're not going to buy it or just be content working with what we have now.
in 10.3 and 10.4 Software Update automatically lets me know when and what updates are availible for all Apple software on my machine. If I decline and update of any kind for whatever reason, it lets me know again 12 hours (approx) later, untill I finally update. I wouldn't say your characterization is true of "most versions" of OS X. Can't say for versions or Linux. And why you're grouping OSX and Linux together anyways just seems silly.
hahahahaha... I know a comment to an AC is useless, but that just made my night. Thanks /. bro(or sis)
With all due respect, have you ever tried running X (not tiger, I'm talking actual X) on your mac? I know it comes with the ability to netboot other machines into an X environment and use your favorite window manager. Maybe it's just my novice status that leads me to say this, but isnt' the only difference between Unix and Linux the cost and somewhat proprietary nature of Unix? I've only had my powerbook for almost a year now, and having used a few different flavors of linux, I like this version of Unix with OS X over it. You're right, it's not for everyone, but all your arguments in favor of linux seem like you're just one of those people who, (sorry) are a Linux fanboi. From everything I see, this is exactly the same as linux from an environment sense. I mean, please explain to a novice like me the difference between OS X and a Linux/BSD+"window manager du juor" environment, because I just really really don't see the difference.
I don't mean to be a troll or to come off insulting, but other than the UI arguments, I don't get your point. It seems like from your description of your setup, you're jumping through hoops to do things that you could have already done from the start. Why did you buy an ibook in the first place?