Bloggers are not journalists. A journalist is a journalist. Some teen expressing an opinion, no matter how well informed and thought out, is not a journalist. Otherwise, everyone with a net connection is a journalist and the term loses meaning. A journalist is accountable to someone, a boss, an editor. Bloggers can lose their accounts (and then get another), but an unethical journalist can be black balled out of the industry. Journalists are paid. Blogging is a hobby. Some bloggers are really smart and reasonably informed and knowledgeable. But they are not journalists.
Blog Entries:
- Dude, I totally got the coffee shop girl's phone number!
- My parents are fascists!
- George W. Bush is a evil meanie! For reasons A, B and C.
Journalist:
- President Bush signed off on HR XYZ.
Pundit/Editorialist:
- HR XYZ is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
- HR XYZ is the worst thing since hemorrhoids and Howard the Duck.
Qualification for Being a Journalist:
- A degree in journalism (which includes classes on ethics)
- Getting a job after interviewing etc
Qualification for Being a Blogger:
- Having an email address
"By your own account, you didn't actually use linux, just attempted to install it - so you've no basis to make that judgment."
Actually, that PROVES his point. He *is* the mass market. Hell, that he has any CONCEPT or has heard of partitions puts him head and shoulders above most users. Most of my users (i'm a sys admin for about 90 ppl) think their monitor is their computer.
This thing is an RC car with guns, not a robot. All discussion of the Laws of Robotics are inapplicable to this system. Discussing laws and the application to POSSIBLE military robots is interesting, so go on, but stop using the word robot to describe SWORDS. For an example of an ACTUAL military robot, look at self guided missiles. i'm not talking about video guided systems like the AGM 122 or Maverick, those are remote controlled. But rather of HARM, Sidewinder and cruise missiles. You program them, set them on a course and they figure out what to do from there. They follow a program... that makes it a robot.
i do get it. But unless and until the community creates an OS that gives users what they want/expect from windows, linux will be "oh look, it's linux, that's l33t, now boot up vista so we can play Halo 3". If linux aspires to be something for servers and for nerds to tinker, then linux has achieved its goal. If linux aspires to compete with Windows and OSX for desktop market share, it is failing and will continue to fail. With a windows box, i know that there are hundreds of companies making thousands of programs for me. If i buy a video card, it will work. With linux, i get an OS that won't run anything i care about other than OO.o and Firefox.
Secure and stable, yes. Not bound to the M$ tax, yes. Developed with principles i believe, yes. Useful to me... no.
Don't get pissy at me for pointing out the truth about linux. i didn't tell these people to make all of these OSes. i didn't tell them to not make or facilitate the making of drivers. i didn't tell video game devs to not make linux ports. Try directing that at that defensiveness at the people making those choices.
"But but if you use windows you are perpetuating their monopoly and removing incentives for devs to make linux programs"
Yes, but i don't want to go without playing WoW and Planetside for a few years hoping they'll catch up. i don't want to have to send and receive poorly converted Word/ODT documents.
If EA wanted to make a game for linux, for which of the 30+ distros should they build it? Should Atari make 30+ versions of Neverwinter Nights 2? How many versions of a video card driver should Invidia have to make? Each driver is going to add to the cost of the video card.
Why would tell me i don't get linux, then ask me if i do, and then tell me again that i don't?
Can someone else give this guy some insightful mods for sticking up for linux? i'll take a few points of troll if that's what i get for being the messenger.
i love you guys, but seriously. If you want to play in the big leagues you have to start acting big league. Instead of making 30 someodd half ass distros, make ONE distro that is a viable competitor. By viable competitor i mean an OS that will run all my games, my video card, my peripherals and without me having to learn command line or having to compile stuff. My XP machine is largely plug and play with all the programs and hardware i have. When the linux shelf at Best Buy is as big as the Windows shelf, then we'll talk. Until then, linux is a novelty and a hobby for nerds.
i'm writing this on a machine that has ubuntu installed, but i'm using the XP install. Why? Because i know how to use it. Because MS Office runs on it. i use OO.o at home as much as i can. But if i want to SHARE something, i do it in MSO.
Nothing would please me more that to see apple and M$ crumble into a bad memory, so please, POOL YOUR EFFORTS.
Seriously. Who says we *have* to double processor power every 18 months? What if we could do it in 6 or 24? So what? Just make the damn chips better and better. If it conforms to ML, fine, if it doesn't get back to work. Maybe the next gen of laptops won't be ML compliant. So what? Cosmically speaking, it doesn't matter./grr
Can does not mean will. i can use my computer as a child pr0n server, or my car as a people mower. The gov't could use tanks to run over my house. The city could use the water supply to poison us all. My tires might explode and send me into on coming traffic.
The slope isn't always slippery. Checks and balances can work. If someone does something wrong with a technology, blame and punish that person. Or better yet, work to prevent misuse in the first place. If such a technology can save lives we should use our existing systems (warrants etc) to make sure they are used properly.
"But they could use these systems without getting a warrant. I saw V for Vendetta, I read UTNE and Orwell."
True, but the potential for abuse is nothing new. Corrupt officials and shadow gov'ts ala X-files can use any number of systems against us. Why, they could even be tracking 19917011 to your real name as i type. Let's get rid of the internets. Did you buy hummus at Trader Joe's? Your bank and the TJ's database says you did. Guess we have to live off the grid and in perpetual fear that the folks we grew up with are watching us. That our neighbors are part of a conspiracy to keep the brother down.
But the slope isn't always slippery. And none of us are that important.
"But what if we *do* become leaders/members of a resistance cell"
Then do what criminals and terrorists do: hide. Use other means. Get all cloak and dagger. We still have the right to assemble and free speech and to own bear arms.
But for now, vote democrat and loosen your sphincters a bit. The water is a bit warmer, but that doesn't mean someone is cooking us. The water, if viewed objectively (without partisan poop tinted goggles), isn't even lukewarm or tepid.
i know, i know, they're out to get me.
Perhaps it is a matter of "random: scientifically" versus "random: practically" or some such. i get that a die roll is not actually random. The position of the die, the turn of my hand, the hardness of the surface etc etc all determine the outcome. But i see random as "i can't predict it". Even if a pipped d6 tends to roll high/low or 3's, for my purposes (determining damage from a rapier), it is "random enough". The article is of course referring to true randomness, not random enough for gaming.
Why use an algorithm? Can't it just pick a number from X to Y? i can pick a number. Is it a limitation of code/the nature of computers? i promise i'm not trying to be argumentative or contrary. i honestly don't get why it's difficult.
One of my own observations:
The Predictability Cone and Funnel
If a car is on the salt flats at full speed, it can turn only a few degrees without tumbling to the driver's death. So for every second of driving there is a few degrees off the original course that they car can possibly be. Each additional second out into the future shows possible locations of the car in an ever widening cone. The further out you try to predict where the car might be, the harder it gets, the less likely you are to be right.
You have a high speed camera trained on the roll of a die, you try to make a prediction of what it will roll. If it is a d6, you have a 1 in 6 chance of being right. You press play on the tape and watch the die tumble. As the die decelerates, it will become more and more apparent what the outcome will be. The possibilities go from 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 to 1, 3, 5 then 1 and 3, then 3. Your ability to predict the outcome increases as the possibilities go down.
You can see the same thing in weather forecasting, it is easier to predict tomorrow than a week from now. As time passes, the weather of next Thursday will be easier and easier to predict. Yes, it's intuitively obvious that this is the case, but it's one of those things that isn't obvious unless you think about it or give it a name.
1) The slope is not always slippery 2) Maybe the frog needs to be boiled
Not insightful, more like paranoid.
Cameras in stores deter shoplifting. Other patrons in the store deter shoplifting. A teacher in a classroom deters misbehavior. Visible police presence deters crime. The possibility of getting caught and punished deters crime. Note the use of "deter", it doesn't prevent, but it does deter. Furthermore, when the deterrence fails, the cameras help find and prosecute criminals. Sure, these systems can be abused, but how do we feel about arguments that gun (owners) are necessarily evil? If these cameras will deter or assist in apprehension/conviction of criminals and terrorists, that's a good thing (TM). If a crooked cop abuses this system, blame that cop, send him to jail and fire his boss. But don't hamstring our efforts to find those who have or intend to kill us.
People wear sky masks when they commit crimes to separate themselves from their actions. This does two things, it allows them them to act in unnatural* ways (like a mime, actor, or kid in a halloween costume). They are trying to avoid accountability for their actions.
Perhaps posting as an AC has a similar motivation.
* Or it could allow them to act they way they really and truely want to act
*sigh* i know i know, it's none of the gov't's business that i'm meeting with al qaeda, and i have the right to break the law all i want so long as i don't get caught.
i'm encrypting this post with ROT-13 twice. Try to crack that!
So i have a question: Why is it so hard to get a computer to do something that a die can do easily? Please 'splain to the non-comp-sci/math person. No, 'splaining would take too long... sum up.
These aren't robots, their remote controlled planes. Robots do things on their own according to a program. Making a machine remote controlled doesn't make it a robot. My car is not a robot, even if i am controlling it from 3 miles away.
What the hell is Warhammer 40? And why does it need 3 digits of resolution? i've heard of Warhammer and Warhammer 40K... is this some sort of inbetween release?
Meh. Most albums have 3 or so good tracks and then the rest is filler so they can push and album out the door. The album is obsolete as a unit of sale. If there are songs that are related to each other or are part of a concept (Abraxis), fine release them together. But don't hold bands hostage in a recording studio to make crap no one wanted.
Do this instead. Release songs, don't worry about the charts. Every 15 or so songs, release a compilation. Call it an album if we must be so sentimental.
Singles can be subtle.
No really. It's true. If bands and labels would worry less about selling tracks and more about making stuff they want to make, people will either buy or not. Pulling emphasis FROM singles charts to touring and making music, the money will follow. i'd much rather get a steady stream of new material that had a high signal to noise ratio, than wait 2 years for 3 tracks i like and 12 that i skip.
Can Ubuntu run MS Office, Neverwinter Nights 2, Planetside, WoW and run the latest video cards, printers etc etc without me having to learn how to compile and use run line? Wake me when it can.
i'm no Windows fan boy, but there are no ready for prime time free versions of Linux. i have Ubuntu on this machine here at work (where i am sys admin), but it can't support my dual monitors or run MS Office (or at least the version my co has). My company doesn't use OO.o, i don't have time to train 100 people how to use OO.o and explain to them why it doesn't have a grammar check. Then deal with the constant complaints that the.ppt a client sent them won't open, or that a vendor gets a fucked up looking file from OO.o conversion.
i would love to have a FOSS that can do everything Windows can do without having to relearn how to use a computer. Nothing would please me more than to see the cathedral crumble. But until that dream becomes a reality, Ubuntu isn't better, it's a toy (look, it's linux, oo neat, ok, now go back to windows so i can work/play). Go to your local Best Buy and compare the shelves holding programs, games and hardware for Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux. Compare the number of people with whom you can share data for those three. It's no contest.
Yes, yes, i know that those benefits of Windows are the result of monopoly and aggressive to unethical practices. i know that FOSS software is more secure and i'm all for it, i use it when ever i can. There are cases when monopoly benefits the user. Imagine if every state in the US had it's own electrical sockets. i can imagine it... i lived in Europe, you drive two hours and your shaver won't work because you need an adapter. i'd much rather see something like Linux come to be dominant, but ONLY if it totally dominates like Windows does now. It is better for developers to spend their time making ONE version of a program (and getting it right) than 3. It is better for Ma and Pa if they can grab ANY printer off the shelf to print out pictures of their kids. It is better for Joe Sys Admin to spend his time posting on/. than running about training users how to use a different OS. It is better for Joe Employee to arrive at his new job and not have to learn a new OS.
That's a big downside for Linux even within itself. There are dozens of flavors of linux. The community must pick ONE and forget the rest if it wants to compete against m$. They could have flavors of one OS (pro, home, server), but the fundamental interface must be the same from flavor to flavor.
Most of the problems people have with Windows are due to it being the Tall Poppy, the big target, or user incompetence. Kind of like the US in the world, now that i think of it.
[offtopic]
Seriously, it's been years and you must have some genius coders on hand that could fix that. Either make it render right or make a filter that can remove the &mdash altogether from the headline.
[/offtopic]
So google had a choice, a censored google for China, or NO google for China.
Which is better for the Chinese people? No google, or some google?
Which is better for google? To allow China to censor their services and get money and get (limited) information to the people, or to let some other company take that deal?
It sucks that the Chinese gov't wants to control their people this way, but something is better than nothing. China will open up over time because it is the only way China can attain the dominance it wants. It's not fair to the people, but it's better than nothing. The North Koreans have 0 google. Google is not evil for cooperating with the Chinese gov't. Companies are at best amoral anyway. The evil is on the part of the Chinese gov't, not google. Google is doing the best it can.
Collecting browser data isn't evil unless they violate privacy laws. If they do, call up a lawyer, call the ACLU, the EFF. If not, don't whine about it. Google gives a great deal of free services, services that other companies would like to charge. Hotmail (last i heard) charges for large storage, and doesn't provide in window chat, word processing, spreadsheets etc etc etc. Google makes it's money by selling advertising and data. As long as they don't sell you name, address, SSN they aren't hurting you. They are giving companies information that (they think) can give them a competitive edge. How is that evil? Unless all profit/business is evil....
You've not described a 'selfless do-gooder', you've described ad wussy, a doormat, a passive person. Whereas you describe yourself as assertive and helpful. People who take abuse do themselves harm which usually will mean harm to someone else down the line.
i see it like alignments in D&D. Internalizing - Externalizing on one axis. Strong - Weak on the other. Externalizing/Strong = Agressive, a bully. Internalizing/Strong = Assertive, stands up for itself, is not a bully. Internalizing/Weak = Passive, doormat. Externalizing/Weak = Passive Aggressive, uses guilt to manipulate people.
It's a work in progress, but seems to right so far.
Slashdot Mirror
i have an idea! Let's teach kids how to use an operating system that is NOTHING like the OSes they will use in any possible working/adult life.
Bloggers are not journalists. A journalist is a journalist. Some teen expressing an opinion, no matter how well informed and thought out, is not a journalist. Otherwise, everyone with a net connection is a journalist and the term loses meaning. A journalist is accountable to someone, a boss, an editor. Bloggers can lose their accounts (and then get another), but an unethical journalist can be black balled out of the industry. Journalists are paid. Blogging is a hobby. Some bloggers are really smart and reasonably informed and knowledgeable. But they are not journalists. Blog Entries: - Dude, I totally got the coffee shop girl's phone number! - My parents are fascists! - George W. Bush is a evil meanie! For reasons A, B and C. Journalist: - President Bush signed off on HR XYZ. Pundit/Editorialist: - HR XYZ is the greatest thing since sliced bread. - HR XYZ is the worst thing since hemorrhoids and Howard the Duck. Qualification for Being a Journalist: - A degree in journalism (which includes classes on ethics) - Getting a job after interviewing etc Qualification for Being a Blogger: - Having an email address
i'm testing NOD32 for my company's AV (100ish PCs). So far it's a ninja. It finds things the others left behind.
Does this mean we are closer to real Zed PMs?
The star gate reference is joking, but the question is serious. Does this mean we are closer to zero point energy?
"By your own account, you didn't actually use linux, just attempted to install it - so you've no basis to make that judgment."
Actually, that PROVES his point. He *is* the mass market. Hell, that he has any CONCEPT or has heard of partitions puts him head and shoulders above most users. Most of my users (i'm a sys admin for about 90 ppl) think their monitor is their computer.
This thing is an RC car with guns, not a robot. All discussion of the Laws of Robotics are inapplicable to this system. Discussing laws and the application to POSSIBLE military robots is interesting, so go on, but stop using the word robot to describe SWORDS. For an example of an ACTUAL military robot, look at self guided missiles. i'm not talking about video guided systems like the AGM 122 or Maverick, those are remote controlled. But rather of HARM, Sidewinder and cruise missiles. You program them, set them on a course and they figure out what to do from there. They follow a program... that makes it a robot.
i do get it. But unless and until the community creates an OS that gives users what they want/expect from windows, linux will be "oh look, it's linux, that's l33t, now boot up vista so we can play Halo 3". If linux aspires to be something for servers and for nerds to tinker, then linux has achieved its goal. If linux aspires to compete with Windows and OSX for desktop market share, it is failing and will continue to fail. With a windows box, i know that there are hundreds of companies making thousands of programs for me. If i buy a video card, it will work. With linux, i get an OS that won't run anything i care about other than OO.o and Firefox. Secure and stable, yes. Not bound to the M$ tax, yes. Developed with principles i believe, yes. Useful to me... no. Don't get pissy at me for pointing out the truth about linux. i didn't tell these people to make all of these OSes. i didn't tell them to not make or facilitate the making of drivers. i didn't tell video game devs to not make linux ports. Try directing that at that defensiveness at the people making those choices. "But but if you use windows you are perpetuating their monopoly and removing incentives for devs to make linux programs" Yes, but i don't want to go without playing WoW and Planetside for a few years hoping they'll catch up. i don't want to have to send and receive poorly converted Word/ODT documents. If EA wanted to make a game for linux, for which of the 30+ distros should they build it? Should Atari make 30+ versions of Neverwinter Nights 2? How many versions of a video card driver should Invidia have to make? Each driver is going to add to the cost of the video card. Why would tell me i don't get linux, then ask me if i do, and then tell me again that i don't? Can someone else give this guy some insightful mods for sticking up for linux? i'll take a few points of troll if that's what i get for being the messenger.
Dear Linux Community,
i love you guys, but seriously. If you want to play in the big leagues you have to start acting big league. Instead of making 30 someodd half ass distros, make ONE distro that is a viable competitor. By viable competitor i mean an OS that will run all my games, my video card, my peripherals and without me having to learn command line or having to compile stuff. My XP machine is largely plug and play with all the programs and hardware i have. When the linux shelf at Best Buy is as big as the Windows shelf, then we'll talk. Until then, linux is a novelty and a hobby for nerds.
i'm writing this on a machine that has ubuntu installed, but i'm using the XP install. Why? Because i know how to use it. Because MS Office runs on it. i use OO.o at home as much as i can. But if i want to SHARE something, i do it in MSO.
Nothing would please me more that to see apple and M$ crumble into a bad memory, so please, POOL YOUR EFFORTS.
Seriously. Who says we *have* to double processor power every 18 months? What if we could do it in 6 or 24? So what? Just make the damn chips better and better. If it conforms to ML, fine, if it doesn't get back to work. Maybe the next gen of laptops won't be ML compliant. So what? Cosmically speaking, it doesn't matter. /grr
Can does not mean will. i can use my computer as a child pr0n server, or my car as a people mower. The gov't could use tanks to run over my house. The city could use the water supply to poison us all. My tires might explode and send me into on coming traffic. The slope isn't always slippery. Checks and balances can work. If someone does something wrong with a technology, blame and punish that person. Or better yet, work to prevent misuse in the first place. If such a technology can save lives we should use our existing systems (warrants etc) to make sure they are used properly. "But they could use these systems without getting a warrant. I saw V for Vendetta, I read UTNE and Orwell." True, but the potential for abuse is nothing new. Corrupt officials and shadow gov'ts ala X-files can use any number of systems against us. Why, they could even be tracking 19917011 to your real name as i type. Let's get rid of the internets. Did you buy hummus at Trader Joe's? Your bank and the TJ's database says you did. Guess we have to live off the grid and in perpetual fear that the folks we grew up with are watching us. That our neighbors are part of a conspiracy to keep the brother down. But the slope isn't always slippery. And none of us are that important. "But what if we *do* become leaders/members of a resistance cell" Then do what criminals and terrorists do: hide. Use other means. Get all cloak and dagger. We still have the right to assemble and free speech and to own bear arms. But for now, vote democrat and loosen your sphincters a bit. The water is a bit warmer, but that doesn't mean someone is cooking us. The water, if viewed objectively (without partisan poop tinted goggles), isn't even lukewarm or tepid. i know, i know, they're out to get me.
Thanks guys. It's making sense.
Thank you.
Perhaps it is a matter of "random: scientifically" versus "random: practically" or some such. i get that a die roll is not actually random. The position of the die, the turn of my hand, the hardness of the surface etc etc all determine the outcome. But i see random as "i can't predict it". Even if a pipped d6 tends to roll high/low or 3's, for my purposes (determining damage from a rapier), it is "random enough". The article is of course referring to true randomness, not random enough for gaming.
Why use an algorithm? Can't it just pick a number from X to Y? i can pick a number. Is it a limitation of code/the nature of computers? i promise i'm not trying to be argumentative or contrary. i honestly don't get why it's difficult.
One of my own observations:
The Predictability Cone and Funnel
If a car is on the salt flats at full speed, it can turn only a few degrees without tumbling to the driver's death. So for every second of driving there is a few degrees off the original course that they car can possibly be. Each additional second out into the future shows possible locations of the car in an ever widening cone. The further out you try to predict where the car might be, the harder it gets, the less likely you are to be right.
You have a high speed camera trained on the roll of a die, you try to make a prediction of what it will roll. If it is a d6, you have a 1 in 6 chance of being right. You press play on the tape and watch the die tumble. As the die decelerates, it will become more and more apparent what the outcome will be. The possibilities go from 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 to 1, 3, 5 then 1 and 3, then 3. Your ability to predict the outcome increases as the possibilities go down.
You can see the same thing in weather forecasting, it is easier to predict tomorrow than a week from now. As time passes, the weather of next Thursday will be easier and easier to predict. Yes, it's intuitively obvious that this is the case, but it's one of those things that isn't obvious unless you think about it or give it a name.
1) The slope is not always slippery
2) Maybe the frog needs to be boiled
Not insightful, more like paranoid.
Cameras in stores deter shoplifting. Other patrons in the store deter shoplifting. A teacher in a classroom deters misbehavior. Visible police presence deters crime. The possibility of getting caught and punished deters crime. Note the use of "deter", it doesn't prevent, but it does deter. Furthermore, when the deterrence fails, the cameras help find and prosecute criminals. Sure, these systems can be abused, but how do we feel about arguments that gun (owners) are necessarily evil? If these cameras will deter or assist in apprehension/conviction of criminals and terrorists, that's a good thing (TM). If a crooked cop abuses this system, blame that cop, send him to jail and fire his boss. But don't hamstring our efforts to find those who have or intend to kill us.
People wear sky masks when they commit crimes to separate themselves from their actions. This does two things, it allows them them to act in unnatural* ways (like a mime, actor, or kid in a halloween costume). They are trying to avoid accountability for their actions.
Perhaps posting as an AC has a similar motivation.
* Or it could allow them to act they way they really and truely want to act
*sigh* i know i know, it's none of the gov't's business that i'm meeting with al qaeda, and i have the right to break the law all i want so long as i don't get caught.
i'm encrypting this post with ROT-13 twice. Try to crack that! So i have a question: Why is it so hard to get a computer to do something that a die can do easily? Please 'splain to the non-comp-sci/math person. No, 'splaining would take too long... sum up.
These aren't robots, their remote controlled planes. Robots do things on their own according to a program. Making a machine remote controlled doesn't make it a robot. My car is not a robot, even if i am controlling it from 3 miles away.
What the hell is Warhammer 40? And why does it need 3 digits of resolution? i've heard of Warhammer and Warhammer 40K... is this some sort of inbetween release?
Can it run NWN2, Planetside, WoW and MS Office?
Slippery slope fallacy.
Meh. Most albums have 3 or so good tracks and then the rest is filler so they can push and album out the door. The album is obsolete as a unit of sale. If there are songs that are related to each other or are part of a concept (Abraxis), fine release them together. But don't hold bands hostage in a recording studio to make crap no one wanted. Do this instead. Release songs, don't worry about the charts. Every 15 or so songs, release a compilation. Call it an album if we must be so sentimental. Singles can be subtle. No really. It's true. If bands and labels would worry less about selling tracks and more about making stuff they want to make, people will either buy or not. Pulling emphasis FROM singles charts to touring and making music, the money will follow. i'd much rather get a steady stream of new material that had a high signal to noise ratio, than wait 2 years for 3 tracks i like and 12 that i skip.
[grr]
.ppt a client sent them won't open, or that a vendor gets a fucked up looking file from OO.o conversion.
/. than running about training users how to use a different OS. It is better for Joe Employee to arrive at his new job and not have to learn a new OS.
Ubuntu better?
Can Ubuntu run MS Office, Neverwinter Nights 2, Planetside, WoW and run the latest video cards, printers etc etc without me having to learn how to compile and use run line? Wake me when it can.
i'm no Windows fan boy, but there are no ready for prime time free versions of Linux. i have Ubuntu on this machine here at work (where i am sys admin), but it can't support my dual monitors or run MS Office (or at least the version my co has). My company doesn't use OO.o, i don't have time to train 100 people how to use OO.o and explain to them why it doesn't have a grammar check. Then deal with the constant complaints that the
i would love to have a FOSS that can do everything Windows can do without having to relearn how to use a computer. Nothing would please me more than to see the cathedral crumble. But until that dream becomes a reality, Ubuntu isn't better, it's a toy (look, it's linux, oo neat, ok, now go back to windows so i can work/play). Go to your local Best Buy and compare the shelves holding programs, games and hardware for Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux. Compare the number of people with whom you can share data for those three. It's no contest.
Yes, yes, i know that those benefits of Windows are the result of monopoly and aggressive to unethical practices. i know that FOSS software is more secure and i'm all for it, i use it when ever i can. There are cases when monopoly benefits the user. Imagine if every state in the US had it's own electrical sockets. i can imagine it... i lived in Europe, you drive two hours and your shaver won't work because you need an adapter. i'd much rather see something like Linux come to be dominant, but ONLY if it totally dominates like Windows does now. It is better for developers to spend their time making ONE version of a program (and getting it right) than 3. It is better for Ma and Pa if they can grab ANY printer off the shelf to print out pictures of their kids. It is better for Joe Sys Admin to spend his time posting on
That's a big downside for Linux even within itself. There are dozens of flavors of linux. The community must pick ONE and forget the rest if it wants to compete against m$. They could have flavors of one OS (pro, home, server), but the fundamental interface must be the same from flavor to flavor.
Most of the problems people have with Windows are due to it being the Tall Poppy, the big target, or user incompetence. Kind of like the US in the world, now that i think of it.
[/grr]
True.dat i wish i had mod points for you.
[offtopic] Seriously, it's been years and you must have some genius coders on hand that could fix that. Either make it render right or make a filter that can remove the &mdash altogether from the headline. [/offtopic]
Wake me when they invent energon cubes.
So google had a choice, a censored google for China, or NO google for China.
Which is better for the Chinese people? No google, or some google?
Which is better for google? To allow China to censor their services and get money and get (limited) information to the people, or to let some other company take that deal?
It sucks that the Chinese gov't wants to control their people this way, but something is better than nothing. China will open up over time because it is the only way China can attain the dominance it wants. It's not fair to the people, but it's better than nothing. The North Koreans have 0 google. Google is not evil for cooperating with the Chinese gov't. Companies are at best amoral anyway. The evil is on the part of the Chinese gov't, not google. Google is doing the best it can.
Collecting browser data isn't evil unless they violate privacy laws. If they do, call up a lawyer, call the ACLU, the EFF. If not, don't whine about it. Google gives a great deal of free services, services that other companies would like to charge. Hotmail (last i heard) charges for large storage, and doesn't provide in window chat, word processing, spreadsheets etc etc etc. Google makes it's money by selling advertising and data. As long as they don't sell you name, address, SSN they aren't hurting you. They are giving companies information that (they think) can give them a competitive edge. How is that evil? Unless all profit/business is evil....
You've not described a 'selfless do-gooder', you've described ad wussy, a doormat, a passive person. Whereas you describe yourself as assertive and helpful. People who take abuse do themselves harm which usually will mean harm to someone else down the line.
i see it like alignments in D&D. Internalizing - Externalizing on one axis. Strong - Weak on the other. Externalizing/Strong = Agressive, a bully. Internalizing/Strong = Assertive, stands up for itself, is not a bully. Internalizing/Weak = Passive, doormat. Externalizing/Weak = Passive Aggressive, uses guilt to manipulate people.
It's a work in progress, but seems to right so far.