If we never update our devices with new materials, then yeah this will be a problem. However since I have seen articles about various engineers constructing devices from such obscure materials as "refined turkey feathers", I'm not too worried. If we run out of required materials, replacements will be found; they might be less efficient, but they're there.
Personally though I would prefer if we didn't have to make stuff from farm animals, a part of me does feel sorry for the things.
Use less power.
Since I intend for my people to walk among the stars, using less power really isn't an option I want to go with.
Yes it does, and that's always been the biggest flaw of the jury system. The mitigating factor is that there's more than one of them and you need all or nearly all of them to agree for a "death" verdict.
Of course the gaping flaw in that theory is that you could wind up with a guy who used a spiked condom to sodomize three children to death and have him get off because you had a hippy on call that day. On the other hand people could well get the bullet for shoplifting.
Or take another example, if I were on call and couldn't pull the lever, allowing the person to get off; after being later released, he rapes and murders a woman, does that make me responsible? I would say yes it does. So if you don't hold me accountable, you're letting people play with stranger's lives; if you DO hold me accountable, you're teaching others in society to kill in order to save themselves. Would anyone risk not pulling the switch anymore?
Therefore, your idea is flawed because....
[x] It relies upon random people off the street to perform critical administrative tasks of the government.
Societies that have an executioner who takes them into a room where no one can see and makes the person disappear are the barbaric ones, while those societies where the citizens stone the person to death are the civilized ones. It has nothing to do with the pain suffered by the dying, and everything to do with the pain suffered by the living.
Unfortunately your theory is contradicted by reality. See South African, South American and a couple of Middle-Eastern countries. Societies where you get into contact with humans dying often tend to be desensitized to killing whereas societies where it's done behind closed doors have people who are far less willing to actually kill others themselves.
That being said, I'd rather be shot myself. I often wonder about the effects of seeing them check the needle in front of you, I bet more than one inmate wanted to scream "Get on with it damn you.".
Definitely not, and at least one vendor has noticed. Take a look at the direction OSX has gone in. Upon release it was very "gee whiz". Big, candy-looking buttons all meant to look 3-D. Apple slowly but surely has flattened everything out a bit... not as many irritating stripes and a lot more gray vs. the bright blue. Look at screenshots between the initial version and Leopard and the difference is pretty big.
I also think they may be onto something with that. It's hard to get an aesthetic really "right" in that it appeals to everyone. If you check out half the themes on window-blinds; they really are ugly. Not just normal ugly, but ugly in an aggressive, insulting way. Microsoft was right with Windows 95 and on in that slightly off-gray boxes aren't pretty but they're tolerable for long periods.
I considered the same thing, but the difference between France and the US is only 2%. That's 2/100 of the population, which is still a lot. But you're shafting the other 93% to get that. A 93% employment rate means that it's still quite possible for someone dedicated to get a job if they look for a while; it's not really an emergency situation.
This works if you have a highly marketable skill, but not when you're a teenager working in a fast-food restaurant. Some of my mates work in the service industry as casual work during university and this was the same when I was in high school; you would not believe the extent to which people will go to shaft an employee over relatively small amounts of money when they think they can get away with it.
You might not be aware of this but at one point (before the revolution), French policy was "Pay people the minimum they need to live", the financial minister actually said this. My essential point is that it's great when you don't need protection, you can complain that it's pointless. But when you DO need it, it's much better for that protection to be there.
Now here comes the government. "You have to give them 60 days of paid vacation." Nice...so the company what WAS your property now has the government making decisions. That is NOT liberty.
Because if they didn't, employers would try even harder to rectally penetrate their employees. Freedom doesn't include the freedom to shaft others EVEN IF you have the power. Unless you live in a third world warzone; go ahead and move there if you think it's so great.
This all aside the fact that France, for example with it's silly labor laws, ran about 9.5-11% unemployment BEFORE the recession. Hiring someone there is a major liability because you don't own your own property. Protectionism is the only thing keeping French employed. But hey, feel free to continue your march toward a proletarian utopia.
It's 7.5% as of 2008 according to the CIA world Factbook. Compared to 5.7% for the US, 5.5% in the united kingdom and 4.5% in Australia. Balance this against the fact that those employed enjoy substantially improved job conditions. It's not exactly pants wetting-ly bad there.
Your freedoms end where other's freedoms begin, including your freedoms to buy their souls.
So? If those people depend on open source software, they should understand that they might have to actually contribute to make it work for them.
Just because there are more people using open source doesn't mean the developers of the code have to give a damn about those users. There is no obligation in open source. If you're not paying you can't expect anyone to care about your wishes or needs.
You might not realize but 99% of the world aren't computer programmers and have very few meaningful ways of supporting free software. I keep hearing complaints that Linux is improperly supported and that not enough people use it, but at the same time there's this "stuff them" attitude against the users.
You could argue that they should donate if it's so important; however if they're paying money anyway, why not pay for something that already works?
If a team is determined to ignore the users who don't submit patches, then they have no business pushing their software into distros for mass use. Stay as a hobby project and quit wasting everyone's time.
The problem for many users is that bugs in KDE 3.5 (like Amarok transcoding) are being marked wontfix because they won't be present in 4.0. However that same application is incomplete in KDE4. So what are users supposed to do?
You're actually right. Seeing as we only have 21 million people to California's 30~. But, doesn't having more people mean you have more taxpayers? Not to mention, if you give people cheaper preventative medicine, you won't need to do as many vastly expensive life-saving operations.
That's actually a brilliant point, finally they would succeed at what the war in Iraq failed to do by crushing all terrorists in the world into a volume smaller than a single grain of sand. Along with all the rest of the planet.
Which is the spoken prelude to him turning out to be the second coming of the lord. Really a lot of the dislike of Obama seems to stem from a dislike of optimism; almost a reaction against all the people who voted for him. He's been in office only a few days and so far he's not doing too bad a job.
* Bush did NOT come up with some reason to establish martial law * Guatanamo is already being reviewed * Stem cell trials are proceeding * Even North Korea, in between trying to wipe South Korea from the face of the earth has spoken of peace with the new administration
I'd say things are turning out for the best.
It's not like this is even an endorsement of Bush's policy. From what I've seen this is only a lukewarm, "meh" regarding wiretapping. So no, it's not the end of the world.
Regarding free healthcare, I live in a country that provides that and I really love it. So I'm surprised there isn't a strong grassroots movement in America to make it happen.
You can remove modules you do not use/need and even remove functions from the kernel, recompile it and voila. Also, have you heard about XFCE? It is pretty full featured and uses a shitton less memory than windows.
Ah, it's only as simple as recompiling the kernel, so simple anyone could do it then. XFCE isn't an X-server. Do you know what the X-server does? It's not the desktop.
However, tell me how you can get a "functional" windows desktop, without violating any licenses, and have it work inside 90MB.
I never said it had to be open source, not that I care about such things. Your functional XFCE desktop would only have notepad and the file manager, beyond that you'd need additional applications. This would increase your memory usage beyond the limit.
Both the kernel and the Xserver are MUCH bigger now than they were in the past. How will you uninstall those without losing their functionality. For what it does, Windows XP is much leaner memory wise than a functionally equivalent linux distribution. Something with drivers, 3D acceleration, etc.
Time limited licenses are already the way of business applications. Companies don't "arbitrarily" lose access to the tools. If they allow the license to expire, they can't use it anymore. It isn't like one day they suddenly have no access anymore.
If the complaints with Steam are any indication, this should be a concern for anyone who's buying the "right" to use software instead of the software itself. Now I don't really dislike the concept of "rental" that badly. I've signed up to Metaboli in the past, you pay a fixed monthly rate in exchange for being able to stream PC games over the net, you get to play the entire collection, but only as long as you're still up to date. I think that renting -games- is workable. In that it's not a big emergency when the site goes down over the weekend and they all stop working suddenly; which did happen.
And you say you prefer to own your data? No shit? Are you implying that somehow this new version of windows is going to steal your data and give you access only when it wants? Once again, if you want people to take you seriously.. quit making shit up.
If your business relies on this however, you'd probably feel differently about it.
That is pretty twisted. Although it IS said that humor is the best defense mechanism to suffering.
Still if I were giving sound effects to a rifle. I'd probably pick the sound effects from Portal. You know, "Are you still there?" and "I see you." in a high pitched kid's voice.
Sounds like. "If you're not willing to actually do something about your problems, then shut up and let US do something about your problems. Just don't sit there with your thumb up your ass complaining non-stop."
And you are complaining that corporations aren't paying their share? Even though they are following the law to the letter, you're still complaining? Please.
So you think it's ok for someone to get a billion dollar handout then turn around and take advantage of all the loopholes available.
They would be paying their fair share if they were earning all that income from the citizens of Ireland, but they're not. They just say they are. That is the difference.
If all the relevant laws were properly enforced, harshly. It would no longer be true. For a civilian, the punishments are far out of proportion to the potential benefits of committing fraud, robbery and so forth, even if someone were completely amoral, they would think twice.
It would probably be a good idea to enforce this for companies too. Things like fines worth several decades of revenue and the requirement to pay off massive chunks every year or face dissolution of the company and arrests of board members.
I suspect that if companies faced the same scale of punishments that civilians did. They'd be less cavalier with "it's our duty to break the law".
Somewhat maybe. But Hitler was a busy man who made many policy decisions, and World War 2 was a drawn out conflict that we could stand to learn from to prevent anything similar occurring.
For example.. in Mein Kampf he writes that we must set up the child as the most important object of the state. In this way people will accept any compromise to their rights. Where politicians want to firewall Australia from porn, and just coincidentally any anti-government material..... well call me paranoid but I'm seeing a few parallels.
That wasn't my point. I'm not saying they should pay money on the grant. However they're using the infrastructure of their country to make their profits. Not only that but that country gave them a windfall when they got in trouble. In the process of making money, these guys would normally owe taxes, if they weren't so good at dodging them.
After not only benefiting from that infrastructure but also getting bailed, a human would be somewhat embarrassed to keep dodging their responsibility to upkeep their share of the utilities.
Slashdot Mirror
Gene Roddenberry is dead, man.
His spirit lives on.
Personally though I would prefer if we didn't have to make stuff from farm animals, a part of me does feel sorry for the things.
Use less power.
Since I intend for my people to walk among the stars, using less power really isn't an option I want to go with.
Yes it does, and that's always been the biggest flaw of the jury system. The mitigating factor is that there's more than one of them and you need all or nearly all of them to agree for a "death" verdict.
Mwahaha, that's nothing. Check THIS out...
http://www.wincustomize.com/zoom.aspx?skinid=6732&libid=1
Of course the gaping flaw in that theory is that you could wind up with a guy who used a spiked condom to sodomize three children to death and have him get off because you had a hippy on call that day. On the other hand people could well get the bullet for shoplifting.
Or take another example, if I were on call and couldn't pull the lever, allowing the person to get off; after being later released, he rapes and murders a woman, does that make me responsible? I would say yes it does. So if you don't hold me accountable, you're letting people play with stranger's lives; if you DO hold me accountable, you're teaching others in society to kill in order to save themselves. Would anyone risk not pulling the switch anymore?
Therefore, your idea is flawed because....
[x] It relies upon random people off the street to perform critical administrative tasks of the government.
Societies that have an executioner who takes them into a room where no one can see and makes the person disappear are the barbaric ones, while those societies where the citizens stone the person to death are the civilized ones. It has nothing to do with the pain suffered by the dying, and everything to do with the pain suffered by the living.
Unfortunately your theory is contradicted by reality. See South African, South American and a couple of Middle-Eastern countries. Societies where you get into contact with humans dying often tend to be desensitized to killing whereas societies where it's done behind closed doors have people who are far less willing to actually kill others themselves.
That being said, I'd rather be shot myself. I often wonder about the effects of seeing them check the needle in front of you, I bet more than one inmate wanted to scream "Get on with it damn you.".
Definitely not, and at least one vendor has noticed. Take a look at the direction OSX has gone in. Upon release it was very "gee whiz". Big, candy-looking buttons all meant to look 3-D. Apple slowly but surely has flattened everything out a bit... not as many irritating stripes and a lot more gray vs. the bright blue. Look at screenshots between the initial version and Leopard and the difference is pretty big.
I also think they may be onto something with that. It's hard to get an aesthetic really "right" in that it appeals to everyone. If you check out half the themes on window-blinds; they really are ugly. Not just normal ugly, but ugly in an aggressive, insulting way. Microsoft was right with Windows 95 and on in that slightly off-gray boxes aren't pretty but they're tolerable for long periods.
I considered the same thing, but the difference between France and the US is only 2%. That's 2/100 of the population, which is still a lot. But you're shafting the other 93% to get that. A 93% employment rate means that it's still quite possible for someone dedicated to get a job if they look for a while; it's not really an emergency situation.
This works if you have a highly marketable skill, but not when you're a teenager working in a fast-food restaurant. Some of my mates work in the service industry as casual work during university and this was the same when I was in high school; you would not believe the extent to which people will go to shaft an employee over relatively small amounts of money when they think they can get away with it.
You might not be aware of this but at one point (before the revolution), French policy was "Pay people the minimum they need to live", the financial minister actually said this. My essential point is that it's great when you don't need protection, you can complain that it's pointless. But when you DO need it, it's much better for that protection to be there.
Now here comes the government. "You have to give them 60 days of paid vacation." Nice...so the company what WAS your property now has the government making decisions. That is NOT liberty.
Because if they didn't, employers would try even harder to rectally penetrate their employees. Freedom doesn't include the freedom to shaft others EVEN IF you have the power. Unless you live in a third world warzone; go ahead and move there if you think it's so great.
This all aside the fact that France, for example with it's silly labor laws, ran about 9.5-11% unemployment BEFORE the recession. Hiring someone there is a major liability because you don't own your own property. Protectionism is the only thing keeping French employed. But hey, feel free to continue your march toward a proletarian utopia.
It's 7.5% as of 2008 according to the CIA world Factbook. Compared to 5.7% for the US, 5.5% in the united kingdom and 4.5% in Australia. Balance this against the fact that those employed enjoy substantially improved job conditions. It's not exactly pants wetting-ly bad there.
Your freedoms end where other's freedoms begin, including your freedoms to buy their souls.
So? If those people depend on open source software, they should understand that they might have to actually contribute to make it work for them. Just because there are more people using open source doesn't mean the developers of the code have to give a damn about those users. There is no obligation in open source. If you're not paying you can't expect anyone to care about your wishes or needs.
You might not realize but 99% of the world aren't computer programmers and have very few meaningful ways of supporting free software. I keep hearing complaints that Linux is improperly supported and that not enough people use it, but at the same time there's this "stuff them" attitude against the users.
You could argue that they should donate if it's so important; however if they're paying money anyway, why not pay for something that already works?
If a team is determined to ignore the users who don't submit patches, then they have no business pushing their software into distros for mass use. Stay as a hobby project and quit wasting everyone's time.
The problem for many users is that bugs in KDE 3.5 (like Amarok transcoding) are being marked wontfix because they won't be present in 4.0. However that same application is incomplete in KDE4. So what are users supposed to do?
You're actually right. Seeing as we only have 21 million people to California's 30~. But, doesn't having more people mean you have more taxpayers? Not to mention, if you give people cheaper preventative medicine, you won't need to do as many vastly expensive life-saving operations.
That's actually a brilliant point, finally they would succeed at what the war in Iraq failed to do by crushing all terrorists in the world into a volume smaller than a single grain of sand. Along with all the rest of the planet.
Which is the spoken prelude to him turning out to be the second coming of the lord. Really a lot of the dislike of Obama seems to stem from a dislike of optimism; almost a reaction against all the people who voted for him. He's been in office only a few days and so far he's not doing too bad a job.
* Bush did NOT come up with some reason to establish martial law
* Guatanamo is already being reviewed
* Stem cell trials are proceeding
* Even North Korea, in between trying to wipe South Korea from the face of the earth has spoken of peace with the new administration
I'd say things are turning out for the best.
It's not like this is even an endorsement of Bush's policy. From what I've seen this is only a lukewarm, "meh" regarding wiretapping. So no, it's not the end of the world.
Regarding free healthcare, I live in a country that provides that and I really love it. So I'm surprised there isn't a strong grassroots movement in America to make it happen.
But perfectly post WWII....
What's your point?
You can remove modules you do not use/need and even remove functions from the kernel, recompile it and voila. Also, have you heard about XFCE? It is pretty full featured and uses a shitton less memory than windows.
Ah, it's only as simple as recompiling the kernel, so simple anyone could do it then. XFCE isn't an X-server. Do you know what the X-server does? It's not the desktop.
However, tell me how you can get a "functional" windows desktop, without violating any licenses, and have it work inside 90MB.
I never said it had to be open source, not that I care about such things. Your functional XFCE desktop would only have notepad and the file manager, beyond that you'd need additional applications. This would increase your memory usage beyond the limit.
But we can uninstall the bloat.
Both the kernel and the Xserver are MUCH bigger now than they were in the past. How will you uninstall those without losing their functionality. For what it does, Windows XP is much leaner memory wise than a functionally equivalent linux distribution. Something with drivers, 3D acceleration, etc.
Time limited licenses are already the way of business applications. Companies don't "arbitrarily" lose access to the tools. If they allow the license to expire, they can't use it anymore. It isn't like one day they suddenly have no access anymore.
If the complaints with Steam are any indication, this should be a concern for anyone who's buying the "right" to use software instead of the software itself. Now I don't really dislike the concept of "rental" that badly. I've signed up to Metaboli in the past, you pay a fixed monthly rate in exchange for being able to stream PC games over the net, you get to play the entire collection, but only as long as you're still up to date. I think that renting -games- is workable. In that it's not a big emergency when the site goes down over the weekend and they all stop working suddenly; which did happen.
And you say you prefer to own your data? No shit? Are you implying that somehow this new version of windows is going to steal your data and give you access only when it wants? Once again, if you want people to take you seriously.. quit making shit up.
If your business relies on this however, you'd probably feel differently about it.
So this really is a killer app...
That is pretty twisted. Although it IS said that humor is the best defense mechanism to suffering.
Still if I were giving sound effects to a rifle. I'd probably pick the sound effects from Portal. You know, "Are you still there?" and "I see you." in a high pitched kid's voice.
Sounds like. "If you're not willing to actually do something about your problems, then shut up and let US do something about your problems. Just don't sit there with your thumb up your ass complaining non-stop."
And you are complaining that corporations aren't paying their share? Even though they are following the law to the letter, you're still complaining? Please.
So you think it's ok for someone to get a billion dollar handout then turn around and take advantage of all the loopholes available.
They would be paying their fair share if they were earning all that income from the citizens of Ireland, but they're not. They just say they are. That is the difference.
If all the relevant laws were properly enforced, harshly. It would no longer be true. For a civilian, the punishments are far out of proportion to the potential benefits of committing fraud, robbery and so forth, even if someone were completely amoral, they would think twice.
It would probably be a good idea to enforce this for companies too. Things like fines worth several decades of revenue and the requirement to pay off massive chunks every year or face dissolution of the company and arrests of board members.
I suspect that if companies faced the same scale of punishments that civilians did. They'd be less cavalier with "it's our duty to break the law".
Somewhat maybe. But Hitler was a busy man who made many policy decisions, and World War 2 was a drawn out conflict that we could stand to learn from to prevent anything similar occurring.
For example.. in Mein Kampf he writes that we must set up the child as the most important object of the state. In this way people will accept any compromise to their rights. Where politicians want to firewall Australia from porn, and just coincidentally any anti-government material..... well call me paranoid but I'm seeing a few parallels.
That wasn't my point. I'm not saying they should pay money on the grant. However they're using the infrastructure of their country to make their profits. Not only that but that country gave them a windfall when they got in trouble. In the process of making money, these guys would normally owe taxes, if they weren't so good at dodging them.
After not only benefiting from that infrastructure but also getting bailed, a human would be somewhat embarrassed to keep dodging their responsibility to upkeep their share of the utilities.