I learned to type on a royal manual typewriter and I still miss the action in some ways, but the IBM selectric had the greatest action of all time, this article gives me some hope for the future!
My own opinion as reinforced by comments on Slashdot whenever the subject of keyboards comes up is that anyone who hasn't learned to type on a manual typewriter, or was taught or otherwise learned to type correctly, doesn't know what what they're talking about and most likely doesn't type very well.
That said, your comment is interesting for two reasons. First, it's a reminder that while the effort required to type on manual typewriter is wholely uncessary in this day and age, it did offer the opportunity for one to actually develop good technique and strength in one's fingers and hands. Both are required for efficient and fast typing. When I see people using those so-called ergonomic keyboards, I imagine someone sitting in a bean bag chair whining about their back problems or complaining that sitting in an unpright chair is just "too hard".
Secondly, the IBM selectric did probably offer the best "action" of any keyboard. Musicians understand that term, and evaluate their instrument based on that criteria. What they don't do is complain about the time and effort required to develop strength and good technique, or the ergonomics of playing. They just play, and do so effortlessly for hours on end. On the other hand, what is an ideal "action" for one person may not be the same as for another, so it's unrealistic to expect people to agree on One True Keyboard.
Given that most keyboards today suck, I think we're all stuck making compromises. I have strong hands and fingers but prefer a very light action. If given the choice between an IBM Model M and my Thinkpad, I'd opt to use my Thinkpad. For anyone that doesn't already know how to type fast and accurately, that choice would be absurd.
Prepare to be impressed. We've been able to hide the Windows task bar since Win'98
You're not reading very closely. What you mean by hide is "shrink it down but leave a few pixels of its top edge, but be sure to to unide it whenever you minimise or close an open window". I mean something very different. Yeah, the same since Win98, but so what?
You'll have to list the problems with virtual desktops because they work perfectly on my Win XP system.
Sorry, but I've used every one of them. Floating windows, systray disappearing, innability to keep desktop separate, limited featuresets, bizarre and inconsistent behaviour with "troublesome" apps like Photoshop... do I go on? The most often cited example of a virtual desktop utility is VirtuaWin. Enable it at startup and no system tray. Switch desktops while Firefox is loading a page, and everything slows to a crawl until the page is loaded and Firefox appears in the current (wrong) window. I can cite more problems, but why flog a dead horse?
What does work, and I'll repeat myself again, is replacing the explorer shell and using something very different than the collection of nutty little apps that try and implement something Microsoft itself can't get right, but is taken for granted elsewhere. That approach, however, comes with its own unique issues.
Didja know there's a few apps out there that offer the ability to "really hide" the taskbar (and keep it hidden)? Yeah, really. They sortofkindofwork, just like virtual desktops.
For those of us not all that interested in gosh gee whiz features...
Agreed, but I'm still scratching my head after all these years wondering why so much emphasis is still being placed on the taskbar when virtual desktops offer a better solution.
The idea of relying the taskbar in the Windows world to switch between applications (typically full screen) may have been appropriate in the day of tiny CRT monitors, and may still be appropriate for those with trivial needs, but I'd prefer to see everyone move on.
Seriously, what is so difficult about virtual desktops? There isn't a single implementation available for Windows (including the "powertoy" from Microsoft) that's not without its problems unless that implementation involves a wholesale replacement of the explorer shell. I use Fluxbox, so perhaps I'm spoiled, but whenever I sit down at a Windows box and have to do some real work, I'm shocked at how limited my options, forcing me into a clickfest of moving things around. If Windows had virtual desktops, I wonder how many would even pay attention to what's displayed on their taskbar?
For now, I'd be impressed to see Microsoft allow their users to hide the taskbar. Dunno about anyone else, but when I select "hide", I don't mean "partially hide" because I'm too stupid to know where it went, or "unset hide" whenever an application is minimised or closed to remind me it's still there.
You seriously think things are that simple? Here's a tip: DNS doesn't magically create itself from nothing, and for for those who matter (the folks charged with making things work), the ability to use host names is simply a byproduct of using numbers. Hell, even Joe Average configuring his Linksys router knows he has to type in a number to connect to it, and probably has that number memorised.
Granted, IPv6 offers other sorts of advantages with respect to day-to-day work, but I don't think anyone can make the claim that it's generally easier.
I don't particularly trust the hardware raid card...
Finally, some common sense. Even if you could trust the RAID card and the rest of the circuitry, your data, if stored in anything other than a simple mirror configuration, is tied to the unit. No different than a RAID card of course.
These units do seeem to fill a largely unmet need, and while they offer lots in the area of convenience, I'd suggest they're a poor bargain given the uncertainties and potential for losing one's data. Too bad really. Building your own going the mini-ITX route isn't much better.
Maybe your entire philosophical platform, I've never seen a need for free will. The whole idea is pure anthropocentric hubris.
My sentiments exactly.
No doubt the notions associated with free will have been useful in certain political and social movements of the past, but its value at the present time seems to be to sell books and provide employment (or TV shows) for its practitioners, and resembles a posture more than some underlying or fundamental principle.
It's not that long ago when, for example, the expression "holding oneself in high esteem" was considered a pejorative. Today we're told it's something we should strive for, as though an ego centric life on the one extreme, or wearing a comfy sweater while chanting happy sounding aphorisms on the other, is the One True Path to Enlightenment.
Seems to me we need to rediscover humility and re-examine what, if anything, free will really means.
People don't want to buy a quarter-inch drill. They want a quarter-inch hole.
Cute, but who the fuck is the marketer marketing to?
Seems to me that the manufacture and sale of power tools is a big enough industry, and one that spends its marketing dollars a bit differently than someone selling soap, or a quarter-inch hole.
The customers of DeWalt products, for example, would certainly balk at the notion of buying anything other than (or less than) a high quality tool. That would be one that's dependable, understandable, fixable, and works with their other tools. The very definition of the *nix philosophy, innit? People building or fixing houses aren't looking for quarter-inch holes any more than they're looking for a stay at the Holiday Inn.
So while it's common enough for people to use the term "tool" in a vague, handwavy, and possibly disingenuous manner, referring to Windows and Macs (or the programs they run) as tools is valid only in conversations between people who have no idea what they're really talking about.
Allow me an analogy. I cook, so when I'm hungry, I think about things like pots and pans, knives, stoves and ovens (in addition to carefully selected ingredients). Those are tools. You, on the other hand, would probably think of vending machines, room service, or a waiter at restaurant. Two very different discussions, doncha think?
Ports on the side? The right side is where I keep my coffee, and a mouse that I try not to use. The left side is where I keep my pad, a calculator, a book or two or three, and an ashtray for when I get tired of whatever I'm doing. The back, on the other hand, is dead space, all the way across the table to the wall. Why not use the back?
What a PITA! I thought side or front ports were pretty standard now.
They, as are a lack of serial ports. If you want, I can bitch about that, too.;-)
First we had Microsoft making efforts to change the look of their desktop to be something less "ugly" (a characterisation that even Bill Gates used) that took a wrong turn with XP but resulted in something reasonably coherent and possibly attractive in Vista (and its cousin, Vista SP1). Now we have Dell setting aside their traditional look (a make-it-up as-you-go-along aesthetic designed to appeal to one's inner ricer so those cheap-assed plastic/metal boxes with an in-your-face logo would actually sell) for something that actually looks like it was "designed".
Hell, based on the looks, I'd even consider buying one. Someone would first have to convince me that during assembly, the internals weren't selected from a grab bag of parts taken from a randomly changing supplier list, though.
So, kudos to Dell. But let's face it: the real credit belongs to Apple who forced everyone to adopt a higher standard.
Well, if cheating on taxes becomes less profitable...
You may want to enlighten yourself on how easy it is under intense scrutiny by those in charge or otherwise wielding power to be judged non-compliant. Chances are you'll discover that in the area of tax law, "cheating" is not synonymous with "filing incorrectly", "foretting to pay", or "being advised that additional taxes are payable". Granted, people in the public eye should know better, or cover their asses better, but I doubt that you or most other individuals believe it necessary to have on staff a full-time lawyer (let alone a qualified tax attorney), or pay the monthly fees of a large accounting company just so they can file their taxes.
Quite frankly, your comments smacks of trollishness and reminds me how people misuse words in the immigration debate to make disingenous comments. The naturalization process is horrendously complex and the bureaucracy is slower than dirt (not unlike the IRS in many respects). Forgetting to pay a fee, fill out yet another of any number of thousands of possible forms (or doing so incorrectly), or engage in typically innocent or benign behaviour (getting married, stepping out the country for a visit) are mostly technical violations. They do not, in most cases, deserve a characterisation of "illegality", "illegal immigrant" or a "cheat". Unless you're Lou Dobbs, of course.
Since we keep getting told to think about the artists, why is no-one listening to what they're saying?
This reminds me of the popular but incorrect notion that a commercial television network's customers are the viewers, and not the advertisers.
Those tasked with passing legislation are protecting the interests of media companies. By that I don't mean "the Big Bad Media Companies", but companies that generate tax revenue, employ people, and generally contribute to the economy (or more directly to the pockets of those with power). Add to that the notion that we're all living in service economies where the value of IP has replaced more tangible assets, it's easy to see why deference (or "special preference", if you prefer) would be given to corporations instead of the man in the street. The consitutents of the elected representative are, therefore, not the music fans or the guy in the street (even one strumming a guitar), but the media companies.
As to why the "Won't anyone think of the artists?" sentiment falls flat with the Featured Artists Coalition vote, it's because the media companies own it as slogan. They're the ones who have been using it all these years, and they've been shouting the loudest. And if they're the ones who are ostensibly responsible for taking care of or paying their artists, what legislator is going to adopt a position that on its face appears to muck around with private contractual disputes?
On the other hand, if the artists want to use that slogan themselves, thereby effecting some kind of positive change, they'll have to win themselves the power to do that. Broad popular support with the public (unless accompanied by the modern-day equivalent of pitchforks) is rarely enough. In the interim, one can always hope for enlightened legislators to step forward while we're busy adopting workarounds, or moaning about the situation on Slashdot.
Electricity can be measured in excruciatingly fine detail so reading minds has been possible for some time now.
Perhaps you could explain how that's so. Seems to me that while the study is interesting enough, the results are sufficiently crude to dismiss any notion of "reading minds". Put another way, we're still at the "poke it with a stick and see what happens" stage of inquiry. Carefully calibrated poking, perhaps, but not much more.
I don't know whether you're overly fond of imperative constructs, you've been parsing the "will's" and "shalt's" of too many RFCs lately, reading Scripture has taken its toll, or you're just a Star Wars fan, but whatever the reason, hopefully, stop it you will.
But we also shouldn't ignore the high number of people who do poorly in basic English literacy...
You can add history, civics and geography to that list. Throw in a lack of critical reasoning skills and you have all the elements missing from what's required for functioning democracy.
Jay Leno sometime sometimes has a skit on his show where he randomly selects people (college students included) off the street and asks them basic questions like "Who was the first President of the US?" or "How many world wars were fought?" and the majority of those asked couldn't come up with the correct answer.
What is it, I wonder, that kids are taught in schools? If they don't know the stuff asked on a citizenship exam that all immigrants pass, then we shouldn't hold our collective breath expecting basic science knowlege. That's not to say that an increased focus on teaching math and science won't have real benefits.
It's not revolutionary, it's the natural progression.
Agreed, but to the extent a YouTube video mix is a music video, you could say it's revolutionary in that it isn't structured around a clicheed narrative, it lacks the requisite but gratuitous cast of "ho's", and it's not trying to sell records. Each of those, I think, is directly attributable to the fact that the video mix was obviously done by a musician.
Quite honestly, I was really really impressed. Especially considering the rubbish that's regularly produced by "professionals" and aired on TV channels dedicated to this kind of thing.
I was trying to be polite. But now that you mention it, I'd have no trouble at all being subjected to a Guiness ad, for example. Thing is, it's companies with shitty or otherwise suspect products that need advertising the most. How else to sell their products?
I don't want Google keeping a record of that (and showing my kids a "targeted" advertisement for Hairy Hardcore Latinas Gone Loco 3.5)
My first thought (modulo the "hairy" part), but I doubt that the makers of such entertainment advertise much.
I'd keep an open mind, personally. When I visit the Amazon site, for example, I receive plenty of targetted advertising. Some of it is useful (interesting new hardware), some of it absurd (recommending a book on Microsoft Server 2008 because I bought the Sendmail Bat book), but generally, I find Amazon's attempts to be both amusing and, oddly, welcome. Same goes for the emails they send me.
Face it, one of the biggest reason why most of us detest advertising is that it's wielded like a baseball bat. On TV, watching CBS' 60 Minutes invites a barrage of testimonials for geriatric pharmaceuticals (I'm not old!), a prime time show will attack me with ads for pickup trucks (I don't live on a farm), and the sponsors of most any sporting event insist their beer doesn't taste like piss and that I should drink it. Small wonder I stay away from commercial television where possible.
Mind you, there's plenty of legitimate reasons to hate advertising, but I think the non-targetted aspect is one of the biggest.
And because they did, saying nothing right now is not an option, or their shareholders could rightly accuse them of not being duly diligent.
Correct, but that reasoning is the root cause of most of the problems that get discussed to death on Slashdot, isn't it? You can't turn on the television or open a newspaper to learn how intellectual property represents a large part of our economy, and how protecting that property is vital to economic growth. I'd go so far as to say it's become a mantra that's repeated ad nauseum (and uncritically) by anyone who is a stakeholder, or wields any sort of power.
In recent decades, for example, the fraction of the total output of our economy that is essentially conceptual rather than physical has been rising. This trend has, of necessity, shifted the emphasis in asset valuation from physical property to intellectual property and to the legal rights inherent in intellectual property. Though the shift may appear glacial, its impact on legal and economic risk is beginning to be felt.
The upshot of all this? For our elected legislators, like the management of Adobe, [doing] nothing right now is not an option, or [the voters] could rightly accuse them of not being duly diligent. Somebody shouts "There oughta be a law!" and behold, a new law gets passed.
You can debate the merits of the legislation that gets enacted, of course, but there's no secret as to why we have an increasing emphasis on intellectual property laws, in general, and their enforcement, specifically. Seems to me the problem is where it usually is: in the mirror.
At one time, sex not intended for procreation was considered "immoral".
As was spilling one's seed on the ground. Or wherever those spending their time watching internet porn and committing the trifecta of lust, envy and covetousness choose to spill it. Sperm-killers all of them!
The term "killing a baby" is a strong term.
A polite understatement. Admirable on your part, but I wonder whether that's appropriate for those trying to re-frame a debate using terms that are deliberately deceptive, ambiguous, and inflammatory. If two sides can't agree on the terms of a discussion, there can be no meaningful discussion, yes? And those with rigid or otherwise dogmatic views typically can't risk such discussions.
There are valid reasons for a heterogeneous computer system, spread out, with different servers and OS's...so that one event doesn't bring everything down to a complete standstill. Haven't we all learned that single point of failure is a dangerous thing?
No worries, mate. I hear that a copy of everything important gets downloaded to Woodlawn, Maryland for safekeeping and isn't accessible by anyone without top secret clearance.
Bonus points for anyone who can come up with a Chris "Red Hat" Cooper joke.
Yeah. I vote that Illinois also changes the definition of a mile and shortens it so that their residents can get more miles to the gallon! I also vote that they cut the definition of an hour down to 30mins to shorten my working day.
LOL. Next time it'll be a someone saying a gigabtye is 1,000,000,000 bytes!
Slashdot Mirror
I learned to type on a royal manual typewriter and I still miss the action in some ways, but the IBM selectric had the greatest action of all time, this article gives me some hope for the future!
My own opinion as reinforced by comments on Slashdot whenever the subject of keyboards comes up is that anyone who hasn't learned to type on a manual typewriter, or was taught or otherwise learned to type correctly, doesn't know what what they're talking about and most likely doesn't type very well.
That said, your comment is interesting for two reasons. First, it's a reminder that while the effort required to type on manual typewriter is wholely uncessary in this day and age, it did offer the opportunity for one to actually develop good technique and strength in one's fingers and hands. Both are required for efficient and fast typing. When I see people using those so-called ergonomic keyboards, I imagine someone sitting in a bean bag chair whining about their back problems or complaining that sitting in an unpright chair is just "too hard".
Secondly, the IBM selectric did probably offer the best "action" of any keyboard. Musicians understand that term, and evaluate their instrument based on that criteria. What they don't do is complain about the time and effort required to develop strength and good technique, or the ergonomics of playing. They just play, and do so effortlessly for hours on end. On the other hand, what is an ideal "action" for one person may not be the same as for another, so it's unrealistic to expect people to agree on One True Keyboard.
Given that most keyboards today suck, I think we're all stuck making compromises. I have strong hands and fingers but prefer a very light action. If given the choice between an IBM Model M and my Thinkpad, I'd opt to use my Thinkpad. For anyone that doesn't already know how to type fast and accurately, that choice would be absurd.
Prepare to be impressed. We've been able to hide the Windows task bar since Win'98
You're not reading very closely. What you mean by hide is "shrink it down but leave a few pixels of its top edge, but be sure to to unide it whenever you minimise or close an open window". I mean something very different. Yeah, the same since Win98, but so what?
You'll have to list the problems with virtual desktops because they work perfectly on my Win XP system.
Sorry, but I've used every one of them. Floating windows, systray disappearing, innability to keep desktop separate, limited featuresets, bizarre and inconsistent behaviour with "troublesome" apps like Photoshop ... do I go on? The most often cited example of a virtual desktop utility is VirtuaWin. Enable it at startup and no system tray. Switch desktops while Firefox is loading a page, and everything slows to a crawl until the page is loaded and Firefox appears in the current (wrong) window. I can cite more problems, but why flog a dead horse?
What does work, and I'll repeat myself again, is replacing the explorer shell and using something very different than the collection of nutty little apps that try and implement something Microsoft itself can't get right, but is taken for granted elsewhere. That approach, however, comes with its own unique issues.
Didja know there's a few apps out there that offer the ability to "really hide" the taskbar (and keep it hidden)? Yeah, really. They sortofkindofwork, just like virtual desktops.
For those of us not all that interested in gosh gee whiz features ...
Agreed, but I'm still scratching my head after all these years wondering why so much emphasis is still being placed on the taskbar when virtual desktops offer a better solution.
The idea of relying the taskbar in the Windows world to switch between applications (typically full screen) may have been appropriate in the day of tiny CRT monitors, and may still be appropriate for those with trivial needs, but I'd prefer to see everyone move on.
Seriously, what is so difficult about virtual desktops? There isn't a single implementation available for Windows (including the "powertoy" from Microsoft) that's not without its problems unless that implementation involves a wholesale replacement of the explorer shell. I use Fluxbox, so perhaps I'm spoiled, but whenever I sit down at a Windows box and have to do some real work, I'm shocked at how limited my options, forcing me into a clickfest of moving things around. If Windows had virtual desktops, I wonder how many would even pay attention to what's displayed on their taskbar?
For now, I'd be impressed to see Microsoft allow their users to hide the taskbar. Dunno about anyone else, but when I select "hide", I don't mean "partially hide" because I'm too stupid to know where it went, or "unset hide" whenever an application is minimised or closed to remind me it's still there.
Tobacco is not a major contributor to the overall pollution level.
No matter. Few would object to even more tobacco legislation, and the "feel good" payoffs for nearly everyone are substantial enough.
Getting people to drive/use less or pay more, on the other hand ...
Get a name for your machine ...
You seriously think things are that simple? Here's a tip: DNS doesn't magically create itself from nothing, and for for those who matter (the folks charged with making things work), the ability to use host names is simply a byproduct of using numbers. Hell, even Joe Average configuring his Linksys router knows he has to type in a number to connect to it, and probably has that number memorised.
Granted, IPv6 offers other sorts of advantages with respect to day-to-day work, but I don't think anyone can make the claim that it's generally easier.
I don't particularly trust the hardware raid card ...
Finally, some common sense. Even if you could trust the RAID card and the rest of the circuitry, your data, if stored in anything other than a simple mirror configuration, is tied to the unit. No different than a RAID card of course.
These units do seeem to fill a largely unmet need, and while they offer lots in the area of convenience, I'd suggest they're a poor bargain given the uncertainties and potential for losing one's data. Too bad really. Building your own going the mini-ITX route isn't much better.
Maybe your entire philosophical platform, I've never seen a need for free will. The whole idea is pure anthropocentric hubris.
My sentiments exactly.
No doubt the notions associated with free will have been useful in certain political and social movements of the past, but its value at the present time seems to be to sell books and provide employment (or TV shows) for its practitioners, and resembles a posture more than some underlying or fundamental principle.
It's not that long ago when, for example, the expression "holding oneself in high esteem" was considered a pejorative. Today we're told it's something we should strive for, as though an ego centric life on the one extreme, or wearing a comfy sweater while chanting happy sounding aphorisms on the other, is the One True Path to Enlightenment.
Seems to me we need to rediscover humility and re-examine what, if anything, free will really means.
People don't want to buy a quarter-inch drill. They want a quarter-inch hole.
Cute, but who the fuck is the marketer marketing to?
Seems to me that the manufacture and sale of power tools is a big enough industry, and one that spends its marketing dollars a bit differently than someone selling soap, or a quarter-inch hole.
The customers of DeWalt products, for example, would certainly balk at the notion of buying anything other than (or less than) a high quality tool. That would be one that's dependable, understandable, fixable, and works with their other tools. The very definition of the *nix philosophy, innit? People building or fixing houses aren't looking for quarter-inch holes any more than they're looking for a stay at the Holiday Inn.
So while it's common enough for people to use the term "tool" in a vague, handwavy, and possibly disingenuous manner, referring to Windows and Macs (or the programs they run) as tools is valid only in conversations between people who have no idea what they're really talking about.
Allow me an analogy. I cook, so when I'm hungry, I think about things like pots and pans, knives, stoves and ovens (in addition to carefully selected ingredients). Those are tools. You, on the other hand, would probably think of vending machines, room service, or a waiter at restaurant. Two very different discussions, doncha think?
Seriously, laptops still have ports on the back?
Ports on the side? The right side is where I keep my coffee, and a mouse that I try not to use. The left side is where I keep my pad, a calculator, a book or two or three, and an ashtray for when I get tired of whatever I'm doing. The back, on the other hand, is dead space, all the way across the table to the wall. Why not use the back?
What a PITA! I thought side or front ports were pretty standard now.
They, as are a lack of serial ports. If you want, I can bitch about that, too. ;-)
First we had Microsoft making efforts to change the look of their desktop to be something less "ugly" (a characterisation that even Bill Gates used) that took a wrong turn with XP but resulted in something reasonably coherent and possibly attractive in Vista (and its cousin, Vista SP1). Now we have Dell setting aside their traditional look (a make-it-up as-you-go-along aesthetic designed to appeal to one's inner ricer so those cheap-assed plastic/metal boxes with an in-your-face logo would actually sell) for something that actually looks like it was "designed".
Hell, based on the looks, I'd even consider buying one. Someone would first have to convince me that during assembly, the internals weren't selected from a grab bag of parts taken from a randomly changing supplier list, though.
So, kudos to Dell. But let's face it: the real credit belongs to Apple who forced everyone to adopt a higher standard.
Well, if cheating on taxes becomes less profitable ...
You may want to enlighten yourself on how easy it is under intense scrutiny by those in charge or otherwise wielding power to be judged non-compliant. Chances are you'll discover that in the area of tax law, "cheating" is not synonymous with "filing incorrectly", "foretting to pay", or "being advised that additional taxes are payable". Granted, people in the public eye should know better, or cover their asses better, but I doubt that you or most other individuals believe it necessary to have on staff a full-time lawyer (let alone a qualified tax attorney), or pay the monthly fees of a large accounting company just so they can file their taxes.
Quite frankly, your comments smacks of trollishness and reminds me how people misuse words in the immigration debate to make disingenous comments. The naturalization process is horrendously complex and the bureaucracy is slower than dirt (not unlike the IRS in many respects). Forgetting to pay a fee, fill out yet another of any number of thousands of possible forms (or doing so incorrectly), or engage in typically innocent or benign behaviour (getting married, stepping out the country for a visit) are mostly technical violations. They do not, in most cases, deserve a characterisation of "illegality", "illegal immigrant" or a "cheat". Unless you're Lou Dobbs, of course.
Since we keep getting told to think about the artists, why is no-one listening to what they're saying?
This reminds me of the popular but incorrect notion that a commercial television network's customers are the viewers, and not the advertisers.
Those tasked with passing legislation are protecting the interests of media companies. By that I don't mean "the Big Bad Media Companies", but companies that generate tax revenue, employ people, and generally contribute to the economy (or more directly to the pockets of those with power). Add to that the notion that we're all living in service economies where the value of IP has replaced more tangible assets, it's easy to see why deference (or "special preference", if you prefer) would be given to corporations instead of the man in the street. The consitutents of the elected representative are, therefore, not the music fans or the guy in the street (even one strumming a guitar), but the media companies.
As to why the "Won't anyone think of the artists?" sentiment falls flat with the Featured Artists Coalition vote, it's because the media companies own it as slogan. They're the ones who have been using it all these years, and they've been shouting the loudest. And if they're the ones who are ostensibly responsible for taking care of or paying their artists, what legislator is going to adopt a position that on its face appears to muck around with private contractual disputes?
On the other hand, if the artists want to use that slogan themselves, thereby effecting some kind of positive change, they'll have to win themselves the power to do that. Broad popular support with the public (unless accompanied by the modern-day equivalent of pitchforks) is rarely enough. In the interim, one can always hope for enlightened legislators to step forward while we're busy adopting workarounds, or moaning about the situation on Slashdot.
Electricity can be measured in excruciatingly fine detail so reading minds has been possible for some time now.
Perhaps you could explain how that's so. Seems to me that while the study is interesting enough, the results are sufficiently crude to dismiss any notion of "reading minds". Put another way, we're still at the "poke it with a stick and see what happens" stage of inquiry. Carefully calibrated poking, perhaps, but not much more.
We may be turning the West into a collection of police states, but at least they'll be time-efficient police states.
On the other hand, fingerprint analysis will probably remain a slow, laborious and error-prone process.
I don't know whether you're overly fond of imperative constructs, you've been parsing the "will's" and "shalt's" of too many RFCs lately, reading Scripture has taken its toll, or you're just a Star Wars fan, but whatever the reason, hopefully, stop it you will.
But we also shouldn't ignore the high number of people who do poorly in basic English literacy ...
You can add history, civics and geography to that list. Throw in a lack of critical reasoning skills and you have all the elements missing from what's required for functioning democracy.
Jay Leno sometime sometimes has a skit on his show where he randomly selects people (college students included) off the street and asks them basic questions like "Who was the first President of the US?" or "How many world wars were fought?" and the majority of those asked couldn't come up with the correct answer.
What is it, I wonder, that kids are taught in schools? If they don't know the stuff asked on a citizenship exam that all immigrants pass, then we shouldn't hold our collective breath expecting basic science knowlege. That's not to say that an increased focus on teaching math and science won't have real benefits.
It's not revolutionary, it's the natural progression.
Agreed, but to the extent a YouTube video mix is a music video, you could say it's revolutionary in that it isn't structured around a clicheed narrative, it lacks the requisite but gratuitous cast of "ho's", and it's not trying to sell records. Each of those, I think, is directly attributable to the fact that the video mix was obviously done by a musician.
Quite honestly, I was really really impressed. Especially considering the rubbish that's regularly produced by "professionals" and aired on TV channels dedicated to this kind of thing.
There, fixed it for you.
I was trying to be polite. But now that you mention it, I'd have no trouble at all being subjected to a Guiness ad, for example. Thing is, it's companies with shitty or otherwise suspect products that need advertising the most. How else to sell their products?
I don't want Google keeping a record of that (and showing my kids a "targeted" advertisement for Hairy Hardcore Latinas Gone Loco 3.5)
My first thought (modulo the "hairy" part), but I doubt that the makers of such entertainment advertise much.
I'd keep an open mind, personally. When I visit the Amazon site, for example, I receive plenty of targetted advertising. Some of it is useful (interesting new hardware), some of it absurd (recommending a book on Microsoft Server 2008 because I bought the Sendmail Bat book), but generally, I find Amazon's attempts to be both amusing and, oddly, welcome. Same goes for the emails they send me.
Face it, one of the biggest reason why most of us detest advertising is that it's wielded like a baseball bat. On TV, watching CBS' 60 Minutes invites a barrage of testimonials for geriatric pharmaceuticals (I'm not old!), a prime time show will attack me with ads for pickup trucks (I don't live on a farm), and the sponsors of most any sporting event insist their beer doesn't taste like piss and that I should drink it. Small wonder I stay away from commercial television where possible.
Mind you, there's plenty of legitimate reasons to hate advertising, but I think the non-targetted aspect is one of the biggest.
I'd suggest making a joke that uses a Clint Eastwood as Retired Engineer reference, instead.
And because they did, saying nothing right now is not an option, or their shareholders could rightly accuse them of not being duly diligent.
Correct, but that reasoning is the root cause of most of the problems that get discussed to death on Slashdot, isn't it? You can't turn on the television or open a newspaper to learn how intellectual property represents a large part of our economy, and how protecting that property is vital to economic growth. I'd go so far as to say it's become a mantra that's repeated ad nauseum (and uncritically) by anyone who is a stakeholder, or wields any sort of power.
Here's a randomly chosen quote from from Alan Greenspan:
The upshot of all this? For our elected legislators, like the management of Adobe, [doing] nothing right now is not an option, or [the voters] could rightly accuse them of not being duly diligent. Somebody shouts "There oughta be a law!" and behold, a new law gets passed.
You can debate the merits of the legislation that gets enacted, of course, but there's no secret as to why we have an increasing emphasis on intellectual property laws, in general, and their enforcement, specifically. Seems to me the problem is where it usually is: in the mirror.
Maybe we need a Slashdot lobby? ;-)
What ever happened to making policy based on gut feelings ...
Given the continuing popularity of Rush Limbaugh, I'd say there's hope yet!
At one time, sex not intended for procreation was considered "immoral".
As was spilling one's seed on the ground. Or wherever those spending their time watching internet porn and committing the trifecta of lust, envy and covetousness choose to spill it. Sperm-killers all of them!
The term "killing a baby" is a strong term.
A polite understatement. Admirable on your part, but I wonder whether that's appropriate for those trying to re-frame a debate using terms that are deliberately deceptive, ambiguous, and inflammatory. If two sides can't agree on the terms of a discussion, there can be no meaningful discussion, yes? And those with rigid or otherwise dogmatic views typically can't risk such discussions.
There are valid reasons for a heterogeneous computer system, spread out, with different servers and OS's...so that one event doesn't bring everything down to a complete standstill. Haven't we all learned that single point of failure is a dangerous thing?
No worries, mate. I hear that a copy of everything important gets downloaded to Woodlawn, Maryland for safekeeping and isn't accessible by anyone without top secret clearance.
Bonus points for anyone who can come up with a Chris "Red Hat" Cooper joke.
Yeah. I vote that Illinois also changes the definition of a mile and shortens it so that their residents can get more miles to the gallon! I also vote that they cut the definition of an hour down to 30mins to shorten my working day.
LOL. Next time it'll be a someone saying a gigabtye is 1,000,000,000 bytes!