Because expressions like "umm" or "err" can't help carrying meaning even if they are supposed to be empty fillers. For instance they indicate when you are not sure of what you are saying, when you don't want to be too much assertive and coming out as imposing. When you are criticizing someone it signals that you don't want to hurt them but simply state your opinion and that you didn't find the right word, etc., etc...
Then there is the simple fact that a lot people simply write out what they want to "say".
An interesting property of text based communications in internet is that people show their personality through their writing and have realized it. In a way, we become script writers of a collective imaginary stage in which we recreate ourselves.
Unlike a book or a letter where there is an author whose words are definitive and a reply may not come in years or at least months, in the internet, there is not much separation from writer to reader. The readers become writers too and equally, the writer becomes a reader -eager to see a response- the instant he or she stops types the last letter of a message.
True true, still, there is a pervasive subversive feel to media. Spiderman still runs from the police, Neo rebels against the matrix, Dr House does what he thinks right regardless of the legality of his actions, etc, etc... I was hoping this would mean people would still be receptive of these kinds of ideas but it doesn't ring a bell outside of fiction.
So all this *drugging* either comes entirely from Fox and other TV news or, as I suspect, it is simply that there is always something interesting to watch that drugs people? Or both?
Maybe I'm getting it wrong but i see two factors that are preventing a revolution. Firstly, is that the averange folk doesn't think there is anything wrong with governmental power.
They hold power anyway. They have always been able to track down people, to search out logs, to watch over us, with guards rather than cameras. Whenever I talk about this with other they all give that weird look as if I was making a big drama about it. Same thing about facebook. They don't see personal data minding as a problem.
Given that the argument that a little insecurity is worth a ton of freedom as little support with them. Who cares if the government makes a massive land grab of our rights if it might help arresting of a child pornographer terrorist every 5 years?
The other problem is that we lack a way to counter this trend. The only thing that we can do to fix a govern which is fundamentally wrong at the core of its philosophy is to replace it. But with who? How can a bunch of anarchists going to produce a leader?
But really, the irony is that the general populations does think that the government is untrustworthy and corrupt yet sees anarchism as childish, demential and at best, evil.
That's an excellent answer. I'll attempt to give a more concrete answer although without details it is still too abstract.
If the selling point of your company is it's content then use whatever mainstream platform you like. If your platform is already mainstream stick with it. Some mainstream platforms:
ASP.NET. Older versions of ASP are too troublesome and deprecated so they aren't mainstream anymore)
Java. I wouldn't recommend it for new developments but it's not so bad that it needs to be ditched.
PHP. Maximum flexibility, performance, availability of expertise with near the best speed of adaptation to change.
Ruby on Rails. It has survived the hype and it's on the way to become mainstream, is easy to pick up if you are new and has the best speed of adaptation to change.
Soon you will see Air/Flex here but it is still too new and untested. I'd go for Turbogears or Django but I'm a Python fan.
If the selling point of your company is in it's service/software or at least it is an important part of it then the answer depends on you market position.
If you are the market leader or if you market share is increasing, stick with what you have.
If you are at the tail of the food chain or your market share is decreasing and it can be traced back to a software issue, switch to a mainstream platform, Chances are that a novel platform will be more of a hindrance to you than an advantage.
Finally if you are an at average point of the continuum and your market share is more or less stable you are in a good position to start experimenting listen to you developers here. If they complain about the limitations of the platform or are very exited about some new tool let them start small projects with it and if it works go for it.
But it seems you don't have any developers right now, then try to remember what the last developer used to feel about the system. If he/she felt good about the system keep it. Even if developers for this platform are rare they are probably exceptionally talented people and more than make for it.
If the last developer felt limited or dragged by the system then it depends. If the current platform is not mainstream switch to a mainstream one. If the current platform is mainstream then the rules above apply.
But really, we aren't talking about paying taxes on having ideas, but about paying taxes on having copyright/patents on ideas. This is not the stapler in your desk that you own, it's the hired goons that patrol the streets, warrantlessly(1) tap my connection, block my bt traffic, arrases ISPs, hardware manufacturers, schools and colleges and hinder free speech in a world wide war against anybody who might make a similar stapler to that one you have on your desk. And you don't want to pay taxes for it?
1) Unsurprisingly, it isn't a real word but it should!
I think you are overstating the importance of the web as a platform, the web is actually a weak platform to implement most applications. OCR, pixel pushing, music arranging... even IM, email, rss, and blogging is easier and better done in the desktop, and there has always been applications for that, many of them freeware.
On the other hand the OS has never been either a requirement or an impediment for using desktop applications. Of course many, many software developers choose to lock themselves into windows by using windows only apis and libraries, but cross-platform toolkits like gtk+ have existed for years.
What I'm trying to say is that providing good applications is not the job of an OS, it's the job of application developers.
The job of an OS is to be fast, stable, compatible and affordable; and Vista has failed in *all* of these requirements. This is the reason Vista is in problems.
Do you remember just a few days ago a company that infringed the GPL was complaining that the original authors weren't accepting a settlement after they started complying? The reason was obvious, if the only punishment of operating illegally is to be forced to operate legally, it would be in the bests interests of every corporation to infringe until caught.
Although the situation is clearly different, there are a lot of parallels here. Essentially, MSFT didn't act as expected until punishment was imminent, setting a precedent that its ok be a thorn in the hind of interoperability until the very last day. There is due punishment unpaid, but I don't think any action must the taken besides simply not trusting MSFT to pacifically comply in the future... because they won't.
Two things that bother me, besides the fact that instead of releasing the patents to the public they released a "promise" not to sue over those patents.
What does Covered Implementation [sic] and Necessary Claims [sic] mean? As far as this developer understands, Covered Implementation implicates that the promise only covers you as long as you are implementing a OOXML editor, other software might not be so protected, for instance I have had to add "excel" exporters (actually html pages with a different mime type) in some web applications, if my application exports documents to OOXML am I protected?
And if all implementations are covered what does it mean to be a Covered Implementation? Is there such a thing as an Uncovered Implementation? And what does Necessary Claims mean? And why the random Capitalization?
Yeah christians are closer to the bible than catholics but the bible still refuses to be openly discussed and criticized, or at least tries to destroy the credibility of criticizers, with its smart ass disclaimer:
Luke 10:21 "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."
Or its anti-common sense disclaimer:
Jeremiah 17:9 "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
Which warns you not to trust yourself.
There are more anti-intellectual, anti-evidence, anti-common sense stuff in the bible. Personally I prefer Hans Christian Andersen's "The Emperor's New Clothes" which to me is the essence of every religion.
I still commend you for not being catholic, or muslin. Really.
Of course, Facebook has a jihad on privacy and we, slashdotters, understand that every piece of data you give them directly, plus some data they get indirectly, is forever theirs to aggregate, analyze and sell. We also know that some people, specially college students are under enormous peer pressure to join it but, in our characteristic disregard for socialization, blame them for their weakness of character, and down right stupidity.
But, our culture is littered with evidence that we do in fact protect people from themselves all the time. We protect minors from alcohol, we protect children from sex, we protect drivers from accidents, we protect everybody from drug abuse. We protect -as much as possible- everybody from jumping from building, we protect people from falling of riffs, we protect people from wet floor for Gaia's sake.
Of course some of these protections are debatable but the fact is that we do protect people from themselves, all the time. So yes, we have to heavily regulate the activities of Facebook or any other site with such potential for disaster. There is no question about it. Or you disagree because...?
TPB is a passive directory of file sharers, some of which share illegally some of their CDs.
Why isn't the RIAA using the TPB to find infringers and collecting the sweet loots?
Each head is allegedly worth 1,500,000 USD isn't it. Funny thing, to the RIAA, i'm worth nothing, I don't buy their music, they would even have to pay me to listen to their music, in fact they do pay to try to get me into their music, in the form of payola and advertising that I can't turn off fast enough, they could even attempt to make a business model out of not advertising to me because I swear I would be willing to give up some money at the end of the year if that kept the billboards away and Britney off the news. but If I were to upload a CD, I'll be worth more money than I would ever dream to earn. Crazy stuff.
The document you link indicates that Sun -along with all members of the ODF Committee- promises not to sue you unless you sue someone over ODF patents. This is kind of a patent based GPL. Doesn't seem patent encumbered at all from here.
Excuse me, AC is right here, 'm' == 1/1000 according to. Of course the milidollar, as the megadollar or the kilodollar, are muck units but "you also don't know what the fuck you're talking about" is unwarranted and mean.
Great quotes. By the way, I've seen that some goons around here are starting to criticize anyone using liberal quotes, calling them unoriginal non thinking copy pasting drones. Ad hominus, are still quite popular it seems.
No, I have to agree with AC about this, 'Yes', 'No', 'Maybe', 'Sir, don't be an ass' are simple logic. Actually scratch 'simple' there, there is no such a thing as simple logic or complex logic, logic just is.
What you mean is that intelligence is more than prerecorded instances of logic, intelligence is dynamic logic, applied logic. True a database that gives me the year Napoleon died if I ask for it doesn't seem very intelligent, but if I ask it if Napoleon was an idealist and it answers that he can be considered an idealist because he tried to achieve glory over physical well being, I wouldn't hesitate to call it intelligent.
Uhm no, blender developers actually bragged that their UI was designed in close relationship with their users. In fact this movie wasn't really made to show off what blender was capable of doing but figuring out what was missing from the tool chain to make a feature length movie.
The movie was an abstract metaphor of the internal workings of a computer or so says Wikipedia. I think, just like poetry, it is not meant for everyone but the creator like it and that is enough to justify the creation of a movie. Indeed all movies worth watching are made out of passion for the art not the bucks.
But i agree that choosing a lower common denominator with more generic story and narrative would appeal to more people.
Not that I'm dissing pop culture, I believe there are still so much stories to be told...
Slashdot Mirror
Because expressions like "umm" or "err" can't help carrying meaning even if they are supposed to be empty fillers. For instance they indicate when you are not sure of what you are saying, when you don't want to be too much assertive and coming out as imposing. When you are criticizing someone it signals that you don't want to hurt them but simply state your opinion and that you didn't find the right word, etc., etc...
Then there is the simple fact that a lot people simply write out what they want to "say".
An interesting property of text based communications in internet is that people show their personality through their writing and have realized it. In a way, we become script writers of a collective imaginary stage in which we recreate ourselves.
Unlike a book or a letter where there is an author whose words are definitive and a reply may not come in years or at least months, in the internet, there is not much separation from writer to reader. The readers become writers too and equally, the writer becomes a reader -eager to see a response- the instant he or she stops types the last letter of a message.
True true, still, there is a pervasive subversive feel to media. Spiderman still runs from the police, Neo rebels against the matrix, Dr House does what he thinks right regardless of the legality of his actions, etc, etc... I was hoping this would mean people would still be receptive of these kinds of ideas but it doesn't ring a bell outside of fiction.
So all this *drugging* either comes entirely from Fox and other TV news or, as I suspect, it is simply that there is always something interesting to watch that drugs people? Or both?
Anyway, what's preventing a revolution?
Maybe I'm getting it wrong but i see two factors that are preventing a revolution. Firstly, is that the averange folk doesn't think there is anything wrong with governmental power.
They hold power anyway. They have always been able to track down people, to search out logs, to watch over us, with guards rather than cameras. Whenever I talk about this with other they all give that weird look as if I was making a big drama about it. Same thing about facebook. They don't see personal data minding as a problem.
Given that the argument that a little insecurity is worth a ton of freedom as little support with them. Who cares if the government makes a massive land grab of our rights if it might help arresting of a child pornographer terrorist every 5 years?
The other problem is that we lack a way to counter this trend. The only thing that we can do to fix a govern which is fundamentally wrong at the core of its philosophy is to replace it. But with who? How can a bunch of anarchists going to produce a leader?
But really, the irony is that the general populations does think that the government is untrustworthy and corrupt yet sees anarchism as childish, demential and at best, evil.
That's an excellent answer. I'll attempt to give a more concrete answer although without details it is still too abstract.
If the selling point of your company is it's content then use whatever mainstream platform you like. If your platform is already mainstream stick with it. Some mainstream platforms:
ASP.NET. Older versions of ASP are too troublesome and deprecated so they aren't mainstream anymore)
Java. I wouldn't recommend it for new developments but it's not so bad that it needs to be ditched.
PHP. Maximum flexibility, performance, availability of expertise with near the best speed of adaptation to change.
Ruby on Rails. It has survived the hype and it's on the way to become mainstream, is easy to pick up if you are new and has the best speed of adaptation to change.
Soon you will see Air/Flex here but it is still too new and untested. I'd go for Turbogears or Django but I'm a Python fan.
If the selling point of your company is in it's service/software or at least it is an important part of it then the answer depends on you market position.
If you are the market leader or if you market share is increasing, stick with what you have.
If you are at the tail of the food chain or your market share is decreasing and it can be traced back to a software issue, switch to a mainstream platform, Chances are that a novel platform will be more of a hindrance to you than an advantage.
Finally if you are an at average point of the continuum and your market share is more or less stable you are in a good position to start experimenting listen to you developers here. If they complain about the limitations of the platform or are very exited about some new tool let them start small projects with it and if it works go for it.
But it seems you don't have any developers right now, then try to remember what the last developer used to feel about the system. If he/she felt good about the system keep it. Even if developers for this platform are rare they are probably exceptionally talented people and more than make for it.
If the last developer felt limited or dragged by the system then it depends. If the current platform is not mainstream switch to a mainstream one. If the current platform is mainstream then the rules above apply.
I'm done doing your job, back to mine...
But really, we aren't talking about paying taxes on having ideas, but about paying taxes on having copyright/patents on ideas. This is not the stapler in your desk that you own, it's the hired goons that patrol the streets, warrantlessly(1) tap my connection, block my bt traffic, arrases ISPs, hardware manufacturers, schools and colleges and hinder free speech in a world wide war against anybody who might make a similar stapler to that one you have on your desk. And you don't want to pay taxes for it?
1) Unsurprisingly, it isn't a real word but it should!
And suddenly firewire started to make so much sense.
I think you are overstating the importance of the web as a platform, the web is actually a weak platform to implement most applications. OCR, pixel pushing, music arranging... even IM, email, rss, and blogging is easier and better done in the desktop, and there has always been applications for that, many of them freeware.
On the other hand the OS has never been either a requirement or an impediment for using desktop applications. Of course many, many software developers choose to lock themselves into windows by using windows only apis and libraries, but cross-platform toolkits like gtk+ have existed for years.
What I'm trying to say is that providing good applications is not the job of an OS, it's the job of application developers.
The job of an OS is to be fast, stable, compatible and affordable; and Vista has failed in *all* of these requirements. This is the reason Vista is in problems.
IM IN YR /.
FELONNIN YR MSFT
Do you remember just a few days ago a company that infringed the GPL was complaining that the original authors weren't accepting a settlement after they started complying? The reason was obvious, if the only punishment of operating illegally is to be forced to operate legally, it would be in the bests interests of every corporation to infringe until caught.
Although the situation is clearly different, there are a lot of parallels here. Essentially, MSFT didn't act as expected until punishment was imminent, setting a precedent that its ok be a thorn in the hind of interoperability until the very last day. There is due punishment unpaid, but I don't think any action must the taken besides simply not trusting MSFT to pacifically comply in the future... because they won't.
Two things that bother me, besides the fact that instead of releasing the patents to the public they released a "promise" not to sue over those patents.
What does Covered Implementation [sic] and Necessary Claims [sic] mean? As far as this developer understands, Covered Implementation implicates that the promise only covers you as long as you are implementing a OOXML editor, other software might not be so protected, for instance I have had to add "excel" exporters (actually html pages with a different mime type) in some web applications, if my application exports documents to OOXML am I protected?
And if all implementations are covered what does it mean to be a Covered Implementation? Is there such a thing as an Uncovered Implementation? And what does Necessary Claims mean? And why the random Capitalization?
Yeah christians are closer to the bible than catholics but the bible still refuses to be openly discussed and criticized, or at least tries to destroy the credibility of criticizers, with its smart ass disclaimer:
Luke 10:21 "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."
Or its anti-common sense disclaimer:
Jeremiah 17:9 "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
Which warns you not to trust yourself.
There are more anti-intellectual, anti-evidence, anti-common sense stuff in the bible. Personally I prefer Hans Christian Andersen's "The Emperor's New Clothes" which to me is the essence of every religion.
I still commend you for not being catholic, or muslin. Really.
Of course, Facebook has a jihad on privacy and we, slashdotters, understand that every piece of data you give them directly, plus some data they get indirectly, is forever theirs to aggregate, analyze and sell. We also know that some people, specially college students are under enormous peer pressure to join it but, in our characteristic disregard for socialization, blame them for their weakness of character, and down right stupidity.
But, our culture is littered with evidence that we do in fact protect people from themselves all the time. We protect minors from alcohol, we protect children from sex, we protect drivers from accidents, we protect everybody from drug abuse. We protect -as much as possible- everybody from jumping from building, we protect people from falling of riffs, we protect people from wet floor for Gaia's sake.
Of course some of these protections are debatable but the fact is that we do protect people from themselves, all the time. So yes, we have to heavily regulate the activities of Facebook or any other site with such potential for disaster. There is no question about it. Or you disagree because...?
That's not just ironic it's fucking scary. It is starting to keep me awake at nights.
sage
TPB is a passive directory of file sharers, some of which share illegally some of their CDs.
Why isn't the RIAA using the TPB to find infringers and collecting the sweet loots?
Each head is allegedly worth 1,500,000 USD isn't it. Funny thing, to the RIAA, i'm worth nothing, I don't buy their music, they would even have to pay me to listen to their music, in fact they do pay to try to get me into their music, in the form of payola and advertising that I can't turn off fast enough, they could even attempt to make a business model out of not advertising to me because I swear I would be willing to give up some money at the end of the year if that kept the billboards away and Britney off the news. but If I were to upload a CD, I'll be worth more money than I would ever dream to earn. Crazy stuff.
If a kid with only 5 cents in the pockets ends up with 150dls at the end of the day i would call that very impressive.
The document you link indicates that Sun -along with all members of the ODF Committee- promises not to sue you unless you sue someone over ODF patents. This is kind of a patent based GPL. Doesn't seem patent encumbered at all from here.
> try quotlivet and deluge
/* actually try sonata if you can get it to work, i couldn't :( */
fixed
Excuse me, AC is right here, 'm' == 1/1000 according to. Of course the milidollar, as the megadollar or the kilodollar, are muck units but "you also don't know what the fuck you're talking about" is unwarranted and mean.
Summarily:
You must be a riot in parties.
Great quotes. By the way, I've seen that some goons around here are starting to criticize anyone using liberal quotes, calling them unoriginal non thinking copy pasting drones. Ad hominus, are still quite popular it seems.
No, I have to agree with AC about this, 'Yes', 'No', 'Maybe', 'Sir, don't be an ass' are simple logic. Actually scratch 'simple' there, there is no such a thing as simple logic or complex logic, logic just is.
What you mean is that intelligence is more than prerecorded instances of logic, intelligence is dynamic logic, applied logic. True a database that gives me the year Napoleon died if I ask for it doesn't seem very intelligent, but if I ask it if Napoleon was an idealist and it answers that he can be considered an idealist because he tried to achieve glory over physical well being, I wouldn't hesitate to call it intelligent.
You are lying.
iphones don't have the structural strength of bricks and are useless for construction use.
Unlike the holy Americans who have never had their laws abused by corporate interests in all of history.
Logically, that proves why Americans rule the world and the French are absolute losers beyond any hope.
Uhm no, blender developers actually bragged that their UI was designed in close relationship with their users. In fact this movie wasn't really made to show off what blender was capable of doing but figuring out what was missing from the tool chain to make a feature length movie.
The movie was an abstract metaphor of the internal workings of a computer or so says Wikipedia. I think, just like poetry, it is not meant for everyone but the creator like it and that is enough to justify the creation of a movie. Indeed all movies worth watching are made out of passion for the art not the bucks.
But i agree that choosing a lower common denominator with more generic story and narrative would appeal to more people.
Not that I'm dissing pop culture, I believe there are still so much stories to be told...