" Why? If I don't drive a car should I not still have to pay taxes that maintain the roads?
If I don't have kids, shouldn't I still pay taxes to support the schools?
If I don't drink tapwater, shouldn't I still have to pay for water treatment facilities?"
Actually, I would say that NO, you shouldn't. In all of those cases. The fact that you have no choice infringes on your personal freedom. Our country (I know this seems ludicrous now...) was founded as a protest against taxation! Now I will grant that you are correct, that muni-wifi can benefit the whole community indirectly as a whole, but it bugs me that I have to pay for things that I don't want. The way capitalism is meant to work, is that you buy whatever you want. However, if you are forced to give up that choice, and are required to buy certain things, well then you are eliminating the need for competition. Really this is a slippery slope argument, how far does it go before we end up quietly slipping into socialism?? As for that, you may ask "so what's wrong with socialism, all the people's needs are met by the government?". Well, IMHOP, the problem is that it means I give up my choice of how those needs are met. That choice is sacred to me, and I wouldn't give it up for anything. It's liberty and freedom that I value more, not comfort.
bottom line, if the government wants to enter the wifi market, to raise money and compete against the commercial providers, then fine. but there better be checks and balances to ensure they compete fairly, and the people should retain their choice of whether they even want it or not.
agreed. Besides, the true power users will demand better, faster service than the municipality will probably provide. If things are run by the government, they tend to be slow, and not too well organized or maintained. Also they will provide no tech support.
Lots of people will gladly continue to pay for the better service that the telco has the oppurtunity to offer. They would just hate to think they would have another competitor of any kind.
However, also, I think the average citizen should be allowed to opt-out of the muni-wifi and not have to pay if they don't want to use it.
heh
Well I can accept that maybe your school was different, But thats how it felt here in PA. Perhaps I was unfair to say that was the US schools in general, but what more can I have to go on than my own experience.
yknow what...I don't even know why I am bothering to reply here. Every time it's the same...somebody tries to tell me that everything I have seen and heard every day of my life was invalid, and that in some way I'm not entitled to my own damn opinions. Fine, If you want to go and believe that everything is all hunky-dory and all that BS then fine. I'll just shut up and you can all go fly...
I must be the only damn conservative on slashdot, cuz rarely if ever do I get any damn backup. So fine, I know when I've lost...I dont have the time or inclination to continue to beat my head against a liberal brick wall...
so fine, affirmative action is NOT inherently a racist policy...sure...
sure, its cool if clinton embarassed the country as a whole, but not if bush actually tries to DO something about saddam...
sure...the schools are fine, and its totally cool to leave god out.
Sarcasm is the weapon of the weak my friend. People who have no rational or serious argument, resort to sarcasm. It is a dirty ploy to try to tarnish the credibility of those who disagree with them.
I agree the extreme creationists get too much press. I also agree that creationism does not belong in Science class. However, I would suggest also, that spirituality (i don't care what kind) is an essential part of the human condition, and there should be a class for that too. If nothing else it could serve to provide children with the understanding that there are basic human rights (many of which are set down in things like the geneva convention, and exist in a common ofrm in most major religions...) which all people are entitled too. Many parents complain that schools fail to assist with, or even undermine, the parents efforts to provide their children with a basic moral compass. Public schools (I speak from experience here..) ingrain in kids that the world is a nasty, hateful place; that the USA is the rottenest, most corrupt country on earth; and that it is taboo to even DISCUSS certain issues like race, affirmative action, welfare, creationism, etc...(basically anything that doesn't line up with a liberal/secular-humanist agenda).
So, some christian parents home-school their kids, then the pop culture makes a pointed issue of this, as if it's a joke and not a real education.
Scientific American should stick to science, and stop bitching about their political beefs, or the fact that christians are no longer fed to lions. If they represented the IT community at large(which I am a part of), I would be embarassed by their stupidity and avarice. Hence, I am glad they don't.
Well I was referring to academic scientists. What I had in mind is most of my wife's co-workers at UPenn, who are radically liberal in general. I should have been more specific.
Also, I don't agree that Republicans are pro-creationist. My argument about creationism was unrelated to my argument about politics affecting scientist's objectivity.
Once again, perhap I could have been more clear...
There is no place for sarcasm in science. There is no reason they have to diss people who actually have a little faith.
Besides, who says creationism and evolution don't work together. True, either extreme becomes ridiculous. Pure creationism can't explain the fact that organisms evolve over time. Pure evolution can't explain how life arose from non-life, or how it can possibly not be subject to entropy(all systems are breaking down).
As with all extremes, for me it seems that the truth lies in the middle(IMHOP).
God created life, and then allowed it to evolve on it's own.
What's so ridiculous about that?
On the subject of missile defense, the first airplanes didnt work either, should we have given up on them because they were expensive and dangerous?? I don't think so. The reward is worth the risk. The scientific community whining about wasting money is the worst hypocrisy. These people operate on free government grants, are are under no requirement to actually generate any applicable results. Their argument is purely based on a liberal political opposition because the plan is championed by republicans. Total BS.
IMHOP, the more interesting tidbit from this article is the info that XP 64-bit should go on sale next month:-) As the proud owner of 2 athlon 64's, that's actually something I would want to know about....
i'd be more worried about the detriments to the language from "management-speak". adjectives that become verbs, nouns that become verbs, nouns that become adjectives...just general abuse ofcertain over-complex synonyms for simple ideas...
now that is somthing to worry about.
now lets dialog about how we need to form a new paradigm to prevent us from becoming zombiefied and dropping our goals.
results are the key!!
*shiver*
If what is indeed being proposed is a tax on downloadable goods bought online (iTUnes, shareware software...etc..), and not just a blanket tax on downloads of any kind, I see no reason not to have it. Under the precedent set by our regular sales taxes, items tangible or intangible which are bought and paid for online should be taxable under the laws of whatever state the seller is based in.
The devil is in the details here I think...
I hope Bush does exactly that. Whatever vulnerabilities a product has, the vendor should be working to find them out on it's own! I'll say this: If I made a piece of software designed to kill virii, I'd be thrilled if somebody told me it had a bug and showed me how to duplicate it. They are basically doing my work for me, for free...what kind of dipstick would ignore, or worse yet, sue them over this?? Just proves the French courts are not taking this seriously, or perhaps the judges are just dumb...take your pick...
damn skippy! In any case, if anybody really thinks about it, Don't they realize that everybody really falls someplace in the middle? I'd hate to actually agree with Jon Stewart, because he IS a self-admitted vapid windbag...but partisan politics really is "hurting america".
I can see the need to simplify a bit those licences which are in some way redundant.
I think there are at least these which are important and distinct enough to keep in a slightly modified form perhaps:
-GPL
-LGPL
-ZLIB
-BSD
-Creative Commons/Artistic(sort of a combination thereof)
I think those few at least have distinct differences, and should be kept. However, I can see how the LibPNG license for exampleis basically in the same spirit as ZLIB, or how the MIT license is also very much a ZLIB clone with slightly altered wording. (I personally prefer the zlib license so that happens to be the one I use the most and am most familiar with...)
flame away!
if they had spent the first 3 having some fun with the klingons and more about the vulcans vs. andorians (shran is a cool character) instead of all that cold war bull and the xindi garbage, they wouldnt have shot themselves int he foot so bad. I just hate how they go and cancel it just it its at it peak of quality. They let fucking voyager run 7 seasons like TNG and DS9... why not enterprise. plus, Id give bakula props as the best trek captain so far...I hope they bring him back somehow...
I only get 35k as a network administrator, and I was born/raised/schooled in the USA. I'm already looking anyway, I love the work envoronment at the company I'm at, but seriously the pay SUCKS....
I have noticed that same thing a few other users have pointed out, that most posting on internet job boards are bogus. What works best is still personal networking and local newpapers...
this is about the most despicable wrongheaded thing i could ever think of. good god when is somebody gonna find a way to fix this busted ass IP system we have?!?!?!
Yknow if he can write an app to send spams with threading an rotating subjects and all this crap, why couldnt he write a decent CMS, or a groupware system?? see spamming is quick and easy is why. spamming is the dark side.
as long as there is email as we know it now there will be spam, because its too easy to be anonymous. I think we need to give up email en-masse and move to something more effective and secure. something more akin to how gmail works, but not using email for transmission. like a individual message board with IP verification.
might be pie-in-the-sky, but i just hate email...it just doesnt work...time to euthanize it and move on....
all i gotta say is thank god we have the EFF. Without them, i think the internet and largely the USA in many ways would have become a corporate police state LONG ago.....
While we are at it, how about a challege to the existance of the RIAA and MPAA under antitrust law??? Everybody knows they use these organizations for price-fixing.....defeats the purpose of capitalism....
well part of what i was getting at was that the fact that it is illegal makes it more dangerous when people DO get their hands on it, because it couldt be either contaminated or downright poisonous, and frequently IS. if the fda had QC standards for it just like they do for tobacco and alcohol it would be safer for those who choose to use it. simple fact is, you cant stop people from wanting it, and as long as there is demand, there will be a market selling it. for soft drugs like pot and x, i dont think a unilateral ban as we have now is practical or productive. a cap on amount in posession perhaps..(ala what they do in denmark) that might work better to discourage abuse. but some college slacker who has 3 joints on him doesnt deserve jailtime...yknow? to me this is common sense.
where in my comment did i say that?? yeh, nowhere...thought so. point is, restricting free speech OR firearms are both unconstitutional. the bill of rights is there to protect our rights as citizens of the USA, and the patriot act, and the brady bill BOTH erode those rights. dont lump me in with fucking achcroft just cuz i like gun rights jackass
Slashdot Mirror
" Why? If I don't drive a car should I not still have to pay taxes that maintain the roads?
If I don't have kids, shouldn't I still pay taxes to support the schools?
If I don't drink tapwater, shouldn't I still have to pay for water treatment facilities?"
Actually, I would say that NO, you shouldn't. In all of those cases. The fact that you have no choice infringes on your personal freedom. Our country (I know this seems ludicrous now...) was founded as a protest against taxation!
Now I will grant that you are correct, that muni-wifi can benefit the whole community indirectly as a whole, but it bugs me that I have to pay for things that I don't want. The way capitalism is meant to work, is that you buy whatever you want. However, if you are forced to give up that choice, and are required to buy certain things, well then you are eliminating the need for competition.
Really this is a slippery slope argument, how far does it go before we end up quietly slipping into socialism??
As for that, you may ask "so what's wrong with socialism, all the people's needs are met by the government?". Well, IMHOP, the problem is that it means I give up my choice of how those needs are met. That choice is sacred to me, and I wouldn't give it up for anything. It's liberty and freedom that I value more, not comfort.
bottom line, if the government wants to enter the wifi market, to raise money and compete against the commercial providers, then fine. but there better be checks and balances to ensure they compete fairly, and the people should retain their choice of whether they even want it or not.
agreed.
Besides, the true power users will demand better, faster service than the municipality will probably provide. If things are run by the government, they tend to be slow, and not too well organized or maintained. Also they will provide no tech support.
Lots of people will gladly continue to pay for the better service that the telco has the oppurtunity to offer. They would just hate to think they would have another competitor of any kind.
However, also, I think the average citizen should be allowed to opt-out of the muni-wifi and not have to pay if they don't want to use it.
I'd like to get paid consulting fees to just run nessus a few times...hell, where can I sign up?
But then, I could also run it myself, and simply understand the FACT, that a "secure network" is a pipe dream....
If babelfish had a translator for PR-speak here is what it would REALLY say:
Dear Trekkies,
F*** You.
Sincerely,
-Paramount
heh
Well I can accept that maybe your school was different, But thats how it felt here in PA. Perhaps I was unfair to say that was the US schools in general, but what more can I have to go on than my own experience.
yknow what...I don't even know why I am bothering to reply here. Every time it's the same...somebody tries to tell me that everything I have seen and heard every day of my life was invalid, and that in some way I'm not entitled to my own damn opinions. Fine, If you want to go and believe that everything is all hunky-dory and all that BS then fine. I'll just shut up and you can all go fly...
I must be the only damn conservative on slashdot, cuz rarely if ever do I get any damn backup. So fine, I know when I've lost...I dont have the time or inclination to continue to beat my head against a liberal brick wall...
so fine, affirmative action is NOT inherently a racist policy...sure...
sure, its cool if clinton embarassed the country as a whole, but not if bush actually tries to DO something about saddam...
sure...the schools are fine, and its totally cool to leave god out.
I hope you are happy.
Sarcasm is the weapon of the weak my friend. People who have no rational or serious argument, resort to sarcasm. It is a dirty ploy to try to tarnish the credibility of those who disagree with them.
I agree the extreme creationists get too much press. I also agree that creationism does not belong in Science class. However, I would suggest also, that spirituality (i don't care what kind) is an essential part of the human condition, and there should be a class for that too. If nothing else it could serve to provide children with the understanding that there are basic human rights (many of which are set down in things like the geneva convention, and exist in a common ofrm in most major religions...) which all people are entitled too. Many parents complain that schools fail to assist with, or even undermine, the parents efforts to provide their children with a basic moral compass. Public schools (I speak from experience here..) ingrain in kids that the world is a nasty, hateful place; that the USA is the rottenest, most corrupt country on earth; and that it is taboo to even DISCUSS certain issues like race, affirmative action, welfare, creationism, etc...(basically anything that doesn't line up with a liberal/secular-humanist agenda).
So, some christian parents home-school their kids, then the pop culture makes a pointed issue of this, as if it's a joke and not a real education.
Scientific American should stick to science, and stop bitching about their political beefs, or the fact that christians are no longer fed to lions. If they represented the IT community at large(which I am a part of), I would be embarassed by their stupidity and avarice. Hence, I am glad they don't.
Well I was referring to academic scientists. What I had in mind is most of my wife's co-workers at UPenn, who are radically liberal in general. I should have been more specific.
Also, I don't agree that Republicans are pro-creationist. My argument about creationism was unrelated to my argument about politics affecting scientist's objectivity.
Once again, perhap I could have been more clear...
There is no place for sarcasm in science. There is no reason they have to diss people who actually have a little faith. Besides, who says creationism and evolution don't work together. True, either extreme becomes ridiculous. Pure creationism can't explain the fact that organisms evolve over time. Pure evolution can't explain how life arose from non-life, or how it can possibly not be subject to entropy(all systems are breaking down). As with all extremes, for me it seems that the truth lies in the middle(IMHOP). God created life, and then allowed it to evolve on it's own. What's so ridiculous about that? On the subject of missile defense, the first airplanes didnt work either, should we have given up on them because they were expensive and dangerous?? I don't think so. The reward is worth the risk. The scientific community whining about wasting money is the worst hypocrisy. These people operate on free government grants, are are under no requirement to actually generate any applicable results. Their argument is purely based on a liberal political opposition because the plan is championed by republicans. Total BS.
IMHOP, the more interesting tidbit from this article is the info that XP 64-bit should go on sale next month :-) As the proud owner of 2 athlon 64's, that's actually something I would want to know about....
i'd be more worried about the detriments to the language from "management-speak". adjectives that become verbs, nouns that become verbs, nouns that become adjectives...just general abuse ofcertain over-complex synonyms for simple ideas... now that is somthing to worry about. now lets dialog about how we need to form a new paradigm to prevent us from becoming zombiefied and dropping our goals. results are the key!! *shiver*
If what is indeed being proposed is a tax on downloadable goods bought online (iTUnes, shareware software...etc..), and not just a blanket tax on downloads of any kind, I see no reason not to have it. Under the precedent set by our regular sales taxes, items tangible or intangible which are bought and paid for online should be taxable under the laws of whatever state the seller is based in.
The devil is in the details here I think...
I hope Bush does exactly that. Whatever vulnerabilities a product has, the vendor should be working to find them out on it's own! I'll say this: If I made a piece of software designed to kill virii, I'd be thrilled if somebody told me it had a bug and showed me how to duplicate it. They are basically doing my work for me, for free...what kind of dipstick would ignore, or worse yet, sue them over this?? Just proves the French courts are not taking this seriously, or perhaps the judges are just dumb...take your pick...
damn skippy! In any case, if anybody really thinks about it, Don't they realize that everybody really falls someplace in the middle? I'd hate to actually agree with Jon Stewart, because he IS a self-admitted vapid windbag...but partisan politics really is "hurting america".
I can see the need to simplify a bit those licences which are in some way redundant. I think there are at least these which are important and distinct enough to keep in a slightly modified form perhaps:
-GPL
-LGPL
-ZLIB
-BSD
-Creative Commons/Artistic(sort of a combination thereof)
I think those few at least have distinct differences, and should be kept. However, I can see how the LibPNG license for exampleis basically in the same spirit as ZLIB, or how the MIT license is also very much a ZLIB clone with slightly altered wording. (I personally prefer the zlib license so that happens to be the one I use the most and am most familiar with...)
flame away!
true...the 4th season has been the best so far...
if they had spent the first 3 having some fun with the klingons and more about the vulcans vs. andorians (shran is a cool character) instead of all that cold war bull and the xindi garbage, they wouldnt have shot themselves int he foot so bad. I just hate how they go and cancel it just it its at it peak of quality. They let fucking voyager run 7 seasons like TNG and DS9... why not enterprise. plus, Id give bakula props as the best trek captain so far...I hope they bring him back somehow...
wow! ignorant AND un-educated. I don't need to even say anything witty to point out how wrong you are, your spelling mistakes will do it for me....
I only get 35k as a network administrator, and I was born/raised/schooled in the USA. I'm already looking anyway, I love the work envoronment at the company I'm at, but seriously the pay SUCKS.... I have noticed that same thing a few other users have pointed out, that most posting on internet job boards are bogus. What works best is still personal networking and local newpapers...
this is about the most despicable wrongheaded thing i could ever think of. good god when is somebody gonna find a way to fix this busted ass IP system we have?!?!?!
this is a sad day, the end of an era. I am sad to see them go, they made some great stuff. via con dios winamp team!!!
spineless coward that might be even more accurate....
Personally I think a google bomb is in order, who's up for it? flip flopper
Yknow if he can write an app to send spams with threading an rotating subjects and all this crap, why couldnt he write a decent CMS, or a groupware system?? see spamming is quick and easy is why. spamming is the dark side.
as long as there is email as we know it now there will be spam, because its too easy to be anonymous. I think we need to give up email en-masse and move to something more effective and secure. something more akin to how gmail works, but not using email for transmission. like a individual message board with IP verification.
might be pie-in-the-sky, but i just hate email...it just doesnt work...time to euthanize it and move on....
all i gotta say is thank god we have the EFF. Without them, i think the internet and largely the USA in many ways would have become a corporate police state LONG ago.....
While we are at it, how about a challege to the existance of the RIAA and MPAA under antitrust law??? Everybody knows they use these organizations for price-fixing.....defeats the purpose of capitalism....
well part of what i was getting at was that the fact that it is illegal makes it more dangerous when people DO get their hands on it, because it couldt be either contaminated or downright poisonous, and frequently IS. if the fda had QC standards for it just like they do for tobacco and alcohol it would be safer for those who choose to use it. simple fact is, you cant stop people from wanting it, and as long as there is demand, there will be a market selling it. for soft drugs like pot and x, i dont think a unilateral ban as we have now is practical or productive. a cap on amount in posession perhaps..(ala what they do in denmark) that might work better to discourage abuse. but some college slacker who has 3 joints on him doesnt deserve jailtime...yknow? to me this is common sense.
where in my comment did i say that?? yeh, nowhere...thought so. point is, restricting free speech OR firearms are both unconstitutional. the bill of rights is there to protect our rights as citizens of the USA, and the patriot act, and the brady bill BOTH erode those rights. dont lump me in with fucking achcroft just cuz i like gun rights jackass