I seem to recall a stigma about hydro-plants based around local environmental impact. You know, big lake where plants used to be, fish can't swim upstream, blah, blah, blah. It does seem a bit intrusive but definitely better than coal. Regardless, I think the stigma is still around.
I personally view global oil consumption as a syndrom of our industrial expansion & growth. Given it's negative environmental & economical impacts, I can only see us moving on to something else. Now, perhaps nuclear power will fit into that same category. But really, even if it is cheap in the U.S., it could get cheaper.
My question is this: When we finally come up with a cheap (read virtually free) & clean energy source, what ramifications will this have on the global economy?
As an added bonus to your point, increased & widely available high-speed access could help to even out the educational disparity of our population. Easy & cheap access to knowledge is key to education. Not that everyone would take advantage of the opportunity, but those that would could dig themselves out of poverty & into prosperity a little easier.
Yeah, all that preinstalled crap on my new HP just peeved me off. If I want iTunes, I'll download it. If I want WMP, I'll download it. Just keep all that crap off my computer. Or at least give me an option during the ordering process that says something like "check here to leave off all the crap software". Of course, would that mean the hard drive would come wiped clean? Ahhhhh, heaven.
Heh, I'm right in the middle of reading this book (or at least on that refers to "The Singularity"). Good read, it definitely gets the ol' neurons firing up with new ideas (well, new to me).
However, the music can not be listened to on the elevator because it is not an "approved" device.
RIAA Exec: "We are concerned that consumer interests could be threatened by freely distributed music at higher altitudes. By expanding unauthorized recordings past the atmosphere, beings on other worlds may be able to listen to music without the proper licensing. This could potentially destroy civilization & render...... What? Oh, those. Yeah, those are horns. They go well with my hooves & pointy tail, don't you think?"
Not that it would be fool-proof, but I'm willing to bet that access to space of this type would be an incredibly precious commodity, both militarily & commercially (not to mention tourism!). As such, I'm betting there would be a no-fly zone 50 miles wide around this thing, with military air support from an internationally diverse force. Plus, I'm sure there would be incredibly hefty ground security as well.
All I'm saying is, I can hardly imagine some nut getting close enough to do damage (or climb:^) this thing. But then again, if it's used for tourism, we would be hard-pressed to keep some suicide-murdering nutjob from find some way. So perhaps no tourism. Damn! As with all terrorism, the common man/woman suffers & the powers-that-be keep on truckin'.
This may be a "Mr. Obvious" statement, but it seems that language is only important if it is necessary to pass your knowledge & ideas on. It is possible to understand something, but society as a whole would be severely limited if you were not able to express your thoughts & views to others.
For example, imagine trying to articulate the workings of a computer logic chip using only 18th century terminology. Ugh. Without inventing new words & phrases it would not be possible to explain new ideas.
I would tend to agree with the GP, although I'm not sure about the whole right/left brain thing. The reason people at the top of their field are good at explaining things is because they have to be. That's part of the deal. You don't become a "top" person without being able to let others know what you are talking about.
But that doesn't mean that you can't understand something if you can't explain it. What if a word doesn't exist for what you are trying to explain?
In this article, the people can't linguistically (sp?) distinguish between 3 and 100. But I'm sure they understand that there is a difference. They are limited in their ability to use that understanding because they can't articulate it to others (hence the limitation), but they can still comprehend the difference.
An effective language is necessary to express yourself and spread knowledge, but it is not necessarily needed to have understanding in the first place for yourself.
Of course, you realize that Democrats could be characterized in much the same way. Fact is, there are idiots on both sides of the fence. Unfortunately the truly intelligent & thoughtful people in this country tend to stay quiet.
It's only lobbyists, special interests, minorities, etc. that speak up. And these are the people that tend to get one side labeled as "such & such".
Most democrats & repubs that I know in the real world are pretty normal & pretty similar. We just don't say much because we don't feel the need to bitch & whine.
Personally, I wish the government would just give me back some taxes & leave me the hell alone. The last thing I need is Kerry or Bush making decisions for me.
Re:'Flaws' Not that big of a deal
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 1
I have notice a nice little trend in our family that popped out of SP2. My wife now actually attempts to make an effort at security "smarts". The browser seems to be much better, and with the little info pop-up toolbar, it makes it easier for me to set "high" security settings and explain to my family how to get what they want by clicking correctly on trusted sites.
I see the update as more of a helper to less savvy users than those of us who were already security bots.
That's why I'm waiting to get a wireless set. I agree that it would be stupid to have a flatscreen sitting right next to all the other equipment. However, if I could hide the other equipment off to the side or behind the couch or something, then it would be nice to have. The only piece of equipment I ever actually touch is the X-Box, everything else is just run by remote.
So give me a wireless HDTV on the wall, a RF or similar multifunction remote control, hidden equipment, and let the laziness commense!
My problem with convergence is that it makes me wait longer to take advantage of improvements. If I have my PS3, DVR, Computer, Home-Theater, etc. separate I can replace any one of them. If I buy it all together I'm much less likely to purchase another high-priced system to take advantage of a new DVR technology.
KIS,KISS Keep it Separate, Keep it Simple.... Stupid
I found a good way to explain it to friends/family. Imagine you love to woodwork. You don't really care about making money, you just like to do it. Everybody can imagine this. I think some Grandpa in his garage pops into people's head. Now I tell them to imagine that there is no cost associated with the woodworking. Everything is free except your time. Sounds like the perfect hobby.
Most people realize that, given this situation, it would be hard for Grandma to get Grandpa the hell out of the garage. It's a similar situation for a lot of developers of free software. They like to do it and it usually doesn't cost them anything except time. Just a hobby that lots & lots & lots & lots of other people can benefit from.
Why take what you love and make it absolutely unbearable by trying to make money at it.:^)
So you're complaining that people who aren't "savvy" are attempting to install Linux. Wouldn't that be a good thing? And wouldn't that be an opportunity to prove the usability of that particular distro? If they are having too many problems perhaps it's just an indication that Linux isn't "ready" for that class of user yet.
Say what you will, MS caters well to the uninformed. Until Linux does the same, it won't truly be "successful" against Windows.
I would imagine that some sort of free-marktet-like balance would be reached. Perhaps the number of true software developers would decline, with the number of software tweakers & administrators increasing.
But there will always need to be software developers. People won't just sit by and stand for absolutely zero change or improvement. They will be paid by corporations for in-house development or perhaps contracted through service contracts to develop particular things. Whatever it is, the work will need to be done.
However, it sounds like software development might be spread across the globe more. It is because of this that I think the days of being a software developer only are quickly waning in the United States. There is no reason to pay US developers premium rates unless they produce far superior products. I don't see that as necessarily being the case. At least, except for a select few. Perhaps diversifyied skills, including other areas of engineering (or the administrative/support skiills from earlier) will be necessary. Software development could become a secondary skill. That's how it is for me already. I'm not paid to write software, it just kind of happens while I'm doing my "real" job.
I guess my definition of "terrorism" or "terrorist" differs from yours. My definition goes something like this: The purposeful infliction of severe violence against a people innocent of wrongdoing. I tend not to think of strong language & posturing as terrorism. And I also realize there is some variation in how we define "severe". But hey, it's my definition so I'll think of it how I want.:^)
I think our definitions are the only thing holding our views separate. If you take my definition then I (obviously) tend to think my reaction would be appropriate. However, if you take your less severe definition then my angst would decrease.
Of course, I would then feel the need to make a new definition separating the two cases.:^)
Question: Is there a difference between a cop shooting a civilian in the face on purpose and a cop that accidentally shoots a civilian while trying to shoot a robber that was shooting at him/her?
I would imagine that you would agree there is a very distinct differnce between the two situations. By answering "yes" to that question, you agree that there are varying levels of responsiblity and culpability involved in inflicting death. One application of this difference is in comparing terrorists to freedom-fighters or military folks.
Again, I'm not trying to justify death. That's not the conversation we're having here. I'm explaining the ethical difference betwteen terrorism & war.
If you want to talk about whether or not any war is justified then we can have a different discussion. Many people, regardless of what you believe and including myself, believe that there are justified & morally acceptable reasons for death. It is unfortunate that those reasons exist, but they still do. But that isn't the discussion we started.
If you think that there is no difference between a terrorist and a freedom-fighter then you are a sad, sad person. Remember that the presense of "gray area" does not indicate the absense of right and wrong.
Did you even read the entire post, or just pick out what you wanted? The post as a whole formed a full argument for distinguishing terrorism from "freedom fighters" or "war". Individual sentences can be taken differently. Here, let me cater to your short attention span:
Actually, terrorism is about purposefully killing innocent civilians/non-combatants. The reasons don't matter, just the act.
If President Bush had retaliated against the perceived threat in Iraq by intentionally targeting & destroying some elementary schools, that would be terrorism. It doesn't matter if he thought Saddam had WMDs, it only matters if a purposeful act was taken against innocent civilians.
However, when Bush (& the country) were convinced Saddam was a threat we went about matters in a "war-like" matter. We destroyed military targets & targets of military importance. Civilians were killed and civilian targets were hit, but it was not purposeful. Thank goodness that we are not still in the days of massive carpet bombing of cities like WWII.
Now, under that same though process the attack against the USS Cole could be interpreted differently. That was a military target & that would be thought of as an act of war, as opposed to pure terrorism.
We must remember the difference between war & terrorism. Those who wage war are fought against, but not necessarily deamed evil. Those who wage terror are fought against & should most definitely be defined as evil. Terrorists deserve no quarter, no sympathy, and no defense no matter how you feel about their excuses/reasons. They are dogs & should be dealt with accordingly.
There is, as much as many don't like to admit it, evil in the world. There is also right & good. There is often a grey area, but many times there is not. It is our job to try and do our best to uphold good & right and destroy evil.
Terrorists are most definitely evil and should be destroyed.
My current largest "problem" with my techy-home is getting past my wife's paranoia about new technologies. I want to make her old computer into a Linux media server. Problem: she doesn't understand this whole "Linux" thing. Nevermind she hasn't used the thing for a year. Nevermind that I could reinstall XP if things didn't work out. Nevermind that all her data is already in three other places. She doesn't understand it & would rather not deal with it.
I find that whenever I start to think about a new tech project at home, it has to fit into her lifestyle as well. I'm not bitching (much), I'm just stating a fact. She doesn't want to learn to use anything complicated & doesn't want me screwing stuff up. So I can't hack the TiVo, or the X-box, or the coffee-maker;^). I just leave stuff alone and everybody (read her) is happy.
So basically, this means I need TiVo to provide all the interfaces for me, and just let me mess with stuff off on my own. Unfortunately, I have a DirecTV box so I can't do a damn thing. This is my only qualm so far with DirecTV.
There's something to be said for using the "dumb" solution though.
In my graduate work about half the students were US & half were foreign. This was a private university. If you consider what a small fraction of the world's population is american, then you can further see that the foreign students would tend to be the "cream of the crop".
For all of you americans out there, think back to your college days. Now, take the top 10% of each class & make all of your classes with people like that. I know that would make a big difference in student quality in my experiences.
Slashdot Mirror
I seem to recall a stigma about hydro-plants based around local environmental impact. You know, big lake where plants used to be, fish can't swim upstream, blah, blah, blah. It does seem a bit intrusive but definitely better than coal. Regardless, I think the stigma is still around.
I personally view global oil consumption as a syndrom of our industrial expansion & growth. Given it's negative environmental & economical impacts, I can only see us moving on to something else. Now, perhaps nuclear power will fit into that same category. But really, even if it is cheap in the U.S., it could get cheaper.
My question is this: When we finally come up with a cheap (read virtually free) & clean energy source, what ramifications will this have on the global economy?
As an added bonus to your point, increased & widely available high-speed access could help to even out the educational disparity of our population. Easy & cheap access to knowledge is key to education. Not that everyone would take advantage of the opportunity, but those that would could dig themselves out of poverty & into prosperity a little easier.
The internet, better than welfare!
Yeah, all that preinstalled crap on my new HP just peeved me off. If I want iTunes, I'll download it. If I want WMP, I'll download it. Just keep all that crap off my computer. Or at least give me an option during the ordering process that says something like "check here to leave off all the crap software". Of course, would that mean the hard drive would come wiped clean? Ahhhhh, heaven.
Heh, I'm right in the middle of reading this book (or at least on that refers to "The Singularity"). Good read, it definitely gets the ol' neurons firing up with new ideas (well, new to me).
However, the music can not be listened to on the elevator because it is not an "approved" device.
RIAA Exec: "We are concerned that consumer interests could be threatened by freely distributed music at higher altitudes. By expanding unauthorized recordings past the atmosphere, beings on other worlds may be able to listen to music without the proper licensing. This could potentially destroy civilization & render...... What? Oh, those. Yeah, those are horns. They go well with my hooves & pointy tail, don't you think?"
Of course, if they climb high enough, they might just fall up when they let go. :^)
What, you don't think a 60,000 mile climb is realistic? Whatever....
Not that it would be fool-proof, but I'm willing to bet that access to space of this type would be an incredibly precious commodity, both militarily & commercially (not to mention tourism!). As such, I'm betting there would be a no-fly zone 50 miles wide around this thing, with military air support from an internationally diverse force. Plus, I'm sure there would be incredibly hefty ground security as well.
:^) this thing. But then again, if it's used for tourism, we would be hard-pressed to keep some suicide-murdering nutjob from find some way. So perhaps no tourism. Damn! As with all terrorism, the common man/woman suffers & the powers-that-be keep on truckin'.
:P
All I'm saying is, I can hardly imagine some nut getting close enough to do damage (or climb
Did that just turn into a rant?..... Oops!
This may be a "Mr. Obvious" statement, but it seems that language is only important if it is necessary to pass your knowledge & ideas on. It is possible to understand something, but society as a whole would be severely limited if you were not able to express your thoughts & views to others.
For example, imagine trying to articulate the workings of a computer logic chip using only 18th century terminology. Ugh. Without inventing new words & phrases it would not be possible to explain new ideas.
I would tend to agree with the GP, although I'm not sure about the whole right/left brain thing. The reason people at the top of their field are good at explaining things is because they have to be. That's part of the deal. You don't become a "top" person without being able to let others know what you are talking about.
But that doesn't mean that you can't understand something if you can't explain it. What if a word doesn't exist for what you are trying to explain?
In this article, the people can't linguistically (sp?) distinguish between 3 and 100. But I'm sure they understand that there is a difference. They are limited in their ability to use that understanding because they can't articulate it to others (hence the limitation), but they can still comprehend the difference.
An effective language is necessary to express yourself and spread knowledge, but it is not necessarily needed to have understanding in the first place for yourself.
Of course, you realize that Democrats could be characterized in much the same way. Fact is, there are idiots on both sides of the fence. Unfortunately the truly intelligent & thoughtful people in this country tend to stay quiet.
It's only lobbyists, special interests, minorities, etc. that speak up. And these are the people that tend to get one side labeled as "such & such".
Most democrats & repubs that I know in the real world are pretty normal & pretty similar. We just don't say much because we don't feel the need to bitch & whine.
Personally, I wish the government would just give me back some taxes & leave me the hell alone. The last thing I need is Kerry or Bush making decisions for me.
I have notice a nice little trend in our family that popped out of SP2. My wife now actually attempts to make an effort at security "smarts". The browser seems to be much better, and with the little info pop-up toolbar, it makes it easier for me to set "high" security settings and explain to my family how to get what they want by clicking correctly on trusted sites.
I see the update as more of a helper to less savvy users than those of us who were already security bots.
That's why I'm waiting to get a wireless set. I agree that it would be stupid to have a flatscreen sitting right next to all the other equipment. However, if I could hide the other equipment off to the side or behind the couch or something, then it would be nice to have. The only piece of equipment I ever actually touch is the X-Box, everything else is just run by remote.
So give me a wireless HDTV on the wall, a RF or similar multifunction remote control, hidden equipment, and let the laziness commense!
My problem with convergence is that it makes me wait longer to take advantage of improvements. If I have my PS3, DVR, Computer, Home-Theater, etc. separate I can replace any one of them. If I buy it all together I'm much less likely to purchase another high-priced system to take advantage of a new DVR technology.
KIS,KISS
Keep it Separate, Keep it Simple.... Stupid
I found a good way to explain it to friends/family. Imagine you love to woodwork. You don't really care about making money, you just like to do it. Everybody can imagine this. I think some Grandpa in his garage pops into people's head. Now I tell them to imagine that there is no cost associated with the woodworking. Everything is free except your time. Sounds like the perfect hobby.
:^)
Most people realize that, given this situation, it would be hard for Grandma to get Grandpa the hell out of the garage. It's a similar situation for a lot of developers of free software. They like to do it and it usually doesn't cost them anything except time. Just a hobby that lots & lots & lots & lots of other people can benefit from.
Why take what you love and make it absolutely unbearable by trying to make money at it.
The article addresses this better than any of us idiots could.
So you're complaining that people who aren't "savvy" are attempting to install Linux. Wouldn't that be a good thing? And wouldn't that be an opportunity to prove the usability of that particular distro? If they are having too many problems perhaps it's just an indication that Linux isn't "ready" for that class of user yet.
Say what you will, MS caters well to the uninformed. Until Linux does the same, it won't truly be "successful" against Windows.
I would imagine that some sort of free-marktet-like balance would be reached. Perhaps the number of true software developers would decline, with the number of software tweakers & administrators increasing.
But there will always need to be software developers. People won't just sit by and stand for absolutely zero change or improvement. They will be paid by corporations for in-house development or perhaps contracted through service contracts to develop particular things. Whatever it is, the work will need to be done.
However, it sounds like software development might be spread across the globe more. It is because of this that I think the days of being a software developer only are quickly waning in the United States. There is no reason to pay US developers premium rates unless they produce far superior products. I don't see that as necessarily being the case. At least, except for a select few. Perhaps diversifyied skills, including other areas of engineering (or the administrative/support skiills from earlier) will be necessary. Software development could become a secondary skill. That's how it is for me already. I'm not paid to write software, it just kind of happens while I'm doing my "real" job.
Read the fucking post. Did you think about my question?
By the way, are you just one of those anarchist shits that don't even believe right & wrong exist? If so, we're done here.
I guess my definition of "terrorism" or "terrorist" differs from yours. My definition goes something like this: The purposeful infliction of severe violence against a people innocent of wrongdoing. I tend not to think of strong language & posturing as terrorism. And I also realize there is some variation in how we define "severe". But hey, it's my definition so I'll think of it how I want. :^)
:^)
I think our definitions are the only thing holding our views separate. If you take my definition then I (obviously) tend to think my reaction would be appropriate. However, if you take your less severe definition then my angst would decrease.
Of course, I would then feel the need to make a new definition separating the two cases.
Question: Is there a difference between a cop shooting a civilian in the face on purpose and a cop that accidentally shoots a civilian while trying to shoot a robber that was shooting at him/her?
I would imagine that you would agree there is a very distinct differnce between the two situations. By answering "yes" to that question, you agree that there are varying levels of responsiblity and culpability involved in inflicting death. One application of this difference is in comparing terrorists to freedom-fighters or military folks.
Again, I'm not trying to justify death. That's not the conversation we're having here. I'm explaining the ethical difference betwteen terrorism & war.
If you want to talk about whether or not any war is justified then we can have a different discussion. Many people, regardless of what you believe and including myself, believe that there are justified & morally acceptable reasons for death. It is unfortunate that those reasons exist, but they still do. But that isn't the discussion we started.
If you think that there is no difference between a terrorist and a freedom-fighter then you are a sad, sad person. Remember that the presense of "gray area" does not indicate the absense of right and wrong.
Reality indeed.
Did you even read the entire post, or just pick out what you wanted? The post as a whole formed a full argument for distinguishing terrorism from "freedom fighters" or "war". Individual sentences can be taken differently. Here, let me cater to your short attention span:
You're an idiot.
Actually, terrorism is about purposefully killing innocent civilians/non-combatants. The reasons don't matter, just the act.
If President Bush had retaliated against the perceived threat in Iraq by intentionally targeting & destroying some elementary schools, that would be terrorism. It doesn't matter if he thought Saddam had WMDs, it only matters if a purposeful act was taken against innocent civilians.
However, when Bush (& the country) were convinced Saddam was a threat we went about matters in a "war-like" matter. We destroyed military targets & targets of military importance. Civilians were killed and civilian targets were hit, but it was not purposeful. Thank goodness that we are not still in the days of massive carpet bombing of cities like WWII.
Now, under that same though process the attack against the USS Cole could be interpreted differently. That was a military target & that would be thought of as an act of war, as opposed to pure terrorism.
We must remember the difference between war & terrorism. Those who wage war are fought against, but not necessarily deamed evil. Those who wage terror are fought against & should most definitely be defined as evil. Terrorists deserve no quarter, no sympathy, and no defense no matter how you feel about their excuses/reasons. They are dogs & should be dealt with accordingly.
There is, as much as many don't like to admit it, evil in the world. There is also right & good. There is often a grey area, but many times there is not. It is our job to try and do our best to uphold good & right and destroy evil.
Terrorists are most definitely evil and should be destroyed.
My current largest "problem" with my techy-home is getting past my wife's paranoia about new technologies. I want to make her old computer into a Linux media server. Problem: she doesn't understand this whole "Linux" thing. Nevermind she hasn't used the thing for a year. Nevermind that I could reinstall XP if things didn't work out. Nevermind that all her data is already in three other places. She doesn't understand it & would rather not deal with it.
I find that whenever I start to think about a new tech project at home, it has to fit into her lifestyle as well. I'm not bitching (much), I'm just stating a fact. She doesn't want to learn to use anything complicated & doesn't want me screwing stuff up. So I can't hack the TiVo, or the X-box, or the coffee-maker
So basically, this means I need TiVo to provide all the interfaces for me, and just let me mess with stuff off on my own. Unfortunately, I have a DirecTV box so I can't do a damn thing. This is my only qualm so far with DirecTV.
There's something to be said for using the "dumb" solution though.
In my graduate work about half the students were US & half were foreign. This was a private university. If you consider what a small fraction of the world's population is american, then you can further see that the foreign students would tend to be the "cream of the crop".
For all of you americans out there, think back to your college days. Now, take the top 10% of each class & make all of your classes with people like that. I know that would make a big difference in student quality in my experiences.