RealAudio and RealVideo streams on Yahoo! and broadcast.com will probably not be missed that much. Even though RealNetworks was getting pretty good at supporting high-bandwidth connections, Windows Media just seemed to run a little better on my system. It loaded faster, and didn't seem as bloated as RealPlayer.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not pro-Microsoft. In fact, I really don't like them at all! It's just that they may have won this time on the RealAudio/RealVideo vs. Windows Media imbroglio. Sometimes I do prefer Windows Media over RealPlayer, and I don't see the entire situation as a total loss for everyone, except those who don't have Windows Media Player.
It's kind of sad to see this, but it's not that bad, in the big scheme of things. There's always mpegs and MP3 audio...
Compound this with many adults wanting to take a break from watching their own offspring and it's easy to see how print and broadcast media, along with the web and simulation/roleplaying games have been villainized over the years.
Exactly right. You have hit the proverbial nail right on the head, my friend.
The movie "South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut" goes into great detail on this point exactly. Canada, Terrance and Phillip, and Bryan Adams are all evil and bad influences on our children;o)
Funny, but sadly, you can't leave your headlights off with newer cars. There's a thing known as "daytime running lights" that the major automakers are making standard on almost all vehicles. My '99 Chevrolet Prizm has DRLs, and they're all right (though I would never use them at night). So, with a newer car, it's harder to leave the lights off.
After taking a look at the Night Vision feature, I find that it's much better than using high-beam headlights to illuminate the road ahead of you.
On the subject of high beams, let me be the first to say that I absolutely abhor them. People seem to think that their right to see the road should overshadow mine. Sure, they can see everything ahead of them, but I sure can't! It's much worse when an SUV comes up behind you (even with the low beams on). The light reflects off my mirrors and blinds me (even with the rear-view mirror in the "night" position). Some people just don't know how to drive...
Problem is, every time I flash my headlights to tell someone to turn theirs down, they slow down instead, thinking that there's a speed trap ahead. And I'm still blinded. Go figure.
When did people stop taking responsibility for their actions? When the first SUV was created.
Wait until Y10K... eight thousand years from now. Unless something is done to avert a disaster, just about ALL of the world's computers (except maybe Macs) will shit the bed on January 1, 10000.
Disaster is always imminent... it just tends not to manifest itself.
How the hell do you do something like that? I don't think that my penis is worth $1.5 million. No amount of money could make up for the loss of "activity" that would result from a crushed penis (not that I would know, I'm a virgin). Personally, I think it's the guy's fault for not exercising care to keep his penis out of danger while he was dropping his little friends off at the pool.
Could I sue if a McDonald's milkshake between my legs freezes my testes and penis and causes discomfort? Hey, it worked for hot coffee; perhaps it could work for cold beverages as well!
There certainly are some *weird* people in this world...
awkwardone
It might not be a BAD idea...
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 1
If people had to be licensed to use the Internet, it would make them more accountable for their actions and encourage them to think twice before they do anything stupid.
I've been e-mail bombed a few times before. It's not a fun ordeal, especially if you're trying to sift through the debris to find important messages. Only a few times was I able to trace the person who did it (mainly through an IP address or whatever). Other times, I have been out of luck. Requiring Internet users to be licensed would help to make people responsible for their actions and be held culpable for them. Just like the driver of a car can be held responsible for ramming into someone else, so an Internet user should be held responsible for e-mail bombing someone.
Also, if there were an Internet licensing test, it would end up eliminating about 95% of AOL's user base;o)
We need less taxes and less stupid waste, not more taxes.
As Bob Dole, one-time Presidential candidate and now poster boy for Erectile Dysfunction and Viagra once said, "It's time for the government to pinch pennies instead of the American citizens!"
Our money goes towards some of the dumbest things. I heard something about government-sponsored studies to see what causes male sexual arousal or something like that... kind of a segue with the whole Bob Dole thing;o)
oneworld.net - for all the latest WTO summit news.
So why now do we shout "keep the Internet tax-free" when in a hundred years the government will be mired in debt due to our shortsightedness?
Somehow I don't think real-life person-to-person interactions and transactions are going away anytime soon. Some things *need* to be done in person, like depositing a paycheck. I, for one, would not want to buy golf clubs online because I want to check out how they feel and how well I can hit the ball with them before I buy them. Regardless of how much we can do online, people still like to talk to a human (especially when they call for technical support);o)
Even if face-to-face interaction *is* going away, this "moratorium" can always be lifted. Then, the government can tax to its heart's content. Until then, keeping Internet transactions tax-free is certainly the way to go.
However, in the end, the ban should be lifted, and the items should be taxed in the same manner as all international trades are.
Possibly. But how can this be regulated? Remember, the Internet is a vast and often confusing complex which is hard enough to regulate already. Uncle Sam has already failed in regulating Internet content with the (expletive) Communications Decency Act. I'm not sure how countries can monitor transactions done over the Internet and tax them accordingly.
Of course, to avoid tariffs, vendors and consumers could "smuggle" items between nations by conducting "unofficial" transactions under the nose of both governments involved, and get away with it. I can't imagine any *reputable* online vendors doing this, but you never know...
It's about time that Microsoft came up with a good proposal for the World Trade Organisation (WTO) summit in Seattle this week.
Regulating international commerce via the Internet would be a rather tricky endeavour anyways. Sometimes, a company is based in one nation while that company's Web host is in another country. Attempting to impose import/export duties on online transactions would pose a great difficulty because the transaction takes place in a different country from the company's home country, and it must be shipped to yet *another* country (whew!). Microsoft's idea is a very good one, and I hope that the delegates at the summit will be open to it despite the legal troubles Microsoft is dealing with now.
So, Microsoft (the company) isn't all bad (excepting the fact that it's an abusive monopoly), but I still hate Windoze...
For more information about the World Trade Organisation (WTO) summit, visit oneworld.net for up-to-date news and views.
Hey man, I want to use Linux, but my brother either hasn't had the time to hook me up with Linux or doesn't want to. I used Linux for a short time, but I didn't really know what I was doing. Now, a year later, I think I know more than I used to and I could use it as a good desktop operating system.
I don't want to be thought of as a Dino or whatever that is... I hate Windoze.
And the other danger, which is obvious but needs to be restated anyway, is that "sensitive" (i.e., damaging) information pertaining to a company may be deleted from public view.
True. This would mean that if I went on a message board about Bayer and said, "Bayer rises from the ashes of 12,000,000 Jews, Catholics, Gypsies, Poles, Slavs, and handicapped people," I could be censored. Even though my comments contain truth (to this day Bayer still has lawsuits against it regarding their use of humans as laboratory animals), Bayer might object to what I say.
The same principle applies if I say that Adolf Hitler invented the economy car ("Volkswagen" means "People's Car" in German).
This just all sounds too 1984-ish to me.
awkwardone ICQ: 13709677 You can't jump without a.net.
The schools say they don't have the money to spend on more than one or two computer classes, and they have to target those classes to the majority of [semi-computer-illiterate] students. "How to use Windows 95 and M$ Office" and such.
You think that's bad? In our local public school system, the eighth grade computer curriculum revolves around teaching students how to use Windows Help, of all things. They learn how to learn how to use Windows, of all OSes. Are there any worse CS curricula around?
awkwardone ICQ: 13709677 You can't jump without a.net.
They do the exact same thing in Massachusetts. Our photos are digitized and (presumably) stored in a large computer database. Therefore, if they gave access to the photo files to the Secret Service, we wouldn't have to "smile for the Secret Service." Also, our signatures are stored in a database and they are printed on our driver's licenses (we don't have to sign them).
Of course, this system is good for convenience, but it could certainly be abused by a big government agency that likes to snoop...
---- Joseph Bowden ICQ: 13709677 Want to contact me via e-mail?
It is News for Nerds, and it is stuff that matters. We nerds thrive on freedom of speech and freedom of expression, and we also like the ability to make our own choices. We don't like it when people trample on our rights and take away the fundamental freedoms that we have. I don't want any government agency determining what is and what isn't appropriate material. I am an intelligent human being and I can make choices for myself. I don't want the government to tell me what I can and can't see or listen to.
Likewise, if you don't want to read what you don't consider "news for nerds", then just DON'T READ IT! Ignore it! Again, you can filter this out on your user preferences page. You can make that choice, and the government won't have anything to do with it.
---- Joseph Bowden ICQ: 13709677 Want to contact me via e-mail?
Why not just post anonymous people's IP, so they will either register or fear the threat of being harassed by people?
This is a good idea, as it leaves people accountable for their actions and takes away a bit of the sense of anonymity. This would definitely work well for anyone who has a static IP address (some people on cable modems, and a few others).
But herein lies the problem, as has been said by others: What about dynamic IP addresses? Sometimes IP addresses are switched around (which I think most dial-in users have whenever they dial in, they get a new IP address). So all they really have to do is disconnect from their ISP, then reconnect with a new IP address and continue their reign of terror on/. comment boards.
The idea of posting IP addresses is a good one, but there are, as I've said, ways to circumvent it.
---- Joseph Bowden ICQ: 13709677 Want to contact me via e-mail?
First of all, limiting things by IP is not always the best solution. I would hazard a guess to say that 80%+ of all/. readers use dynamic IPs. Not to mention the significant portion of folks who access the site from behind a firewall. With dynamic IPs, its possible for someone to get screwed just because they are on the same ISP as a troll, for instance.
Certainly, I agree with this. It's like with a K-line on IRC. Sometimes you are banned from an IRC server because of the actions of ONE person from your network. At one point the ISP I use (MediaOne Road Runner) was K-lined by Undernet thanks to a lamer's idiocy. So if you try to ban IP addresses, innocent people end up getting shut out because of one person's lameness.
Secondly, I personally do not like the idea of AC posts in the first place.
Amen. It lets a person remain unaccountable for their actions. They can do whatever they damn well please, and they won't have to answer to anyone for what they do. It's like a hit-and-run.
So I would recommend putting together a system that limits the number of AC posts either by some sort of quota system or (and I contradict myself here)
I don't personally favor the idea of quotas. If you use quotas, then some people will get shut out of legitimate commenting only because they got to an article after the quota had been filled. And those who had filled the quota could have been trolls.
This seems to be a difficult situation to fix, and there are many different solutions. They all have their ups and downs. Somehow/. needs to find a happy medium to keep the trolling problem to an absolute minimum and to satisfy everyone.
---- Joseph Bowden ICQ: 13709677 Want to contact me via e-mail?
Slashdot Mirror
RealAudio and RealVideo streams on Yahoo! and broadcast.com will probably not be missed that much. Even though RealNetworks was getting pretty good at supporting high-bandwidth connections, Windows Media just seemed to run a little better on my system. It loaded faster, and didn't seem as bloated as RealPlayer.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not pro-Microsoft. In fact, I really don't like them at all! It's just that they may have won this time on the RealAudio/RealVideo vs. Windows Media imbroglio. Sometimes I do prefer Windows Media over RealPlayer, and I don't see the entire situation as a total loss for everyone, except those who don't have Windows Media Player.
It's kind of sad to see this, but it's not that bad, in the big scheme of things. There's always mpegs and MP3 audio...
awkwardone
Exactly right. You have hit the proverbial nail right on the head, my friend.
The movie "South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut" goes into great detail on this point exactly. Canada, Terrance and Phillip, and Bryan Adams are all evil and bad influences on our children ;o)
awkwardone
Funny, but sadly, you can't leave your headlights off with newer cars. There's a thing known as "daytime running lights" that the major automakers are making standard on almost all vehicles. My '99 Chevrolet Prizm has DRLs, and they're all right (though I would never use them at night). So, with a newer car, it's harder to leave the lights off.
Good idea, though...
awkwardone
After taking a look at the Night Vision feature, I find that it's much better than using high-beam headlights to illuminate the road ahead of you.
On the subject of high beams, let me be the first to say that I absolutely abhor them. People seem to think that their right to see the road should overshadow mine. Sure, they can see everything ahead of them, but I sure can't! It's much worse when an SUV comes up behind you (even with the low beams on). The light reflects off my mirrors and blinds me (even with the rear-view mirror in the "night" position). Some people just don't know how to drive...
Problem is, every time I flash my headlights to tell someone to turn theirs down, they slow down instead, thinking that there's a speed trap ahead. And I'm still blinded. Go figure.
When did people stop taking responsibility for their actions? When the first SUV was created.
awkwardone
Wait until Y10K... eight thousand years from now. Unless something is done to avert a disaster, just about ALL of the world's computers (except maybe Macs) will shit the bed on January 1, 10000.
Disaster is always imminent... it just tends not to manifest itself.
awkwardone
Are you serious?
How the hell do you do something like that? I don't think that my penis is worth $1.5 million. No amount of money could make up for the loss of "activity" that would result from a crushed penis (not that I would know, I'm a virgin). Personally, I think it's the guy's fault for not exercising care to keep his penis out of danger while he was dropping his little friends off at the pool.
Could I sue if a McDonald's milkshake between my legs freezes my testes and penis and causes discomfort? Hey, it worked for hot coffee; perhaps it could work for cold beverages as well!
There certainly are some *weird* people in this world...
awkwardone
If people had to be licensed to use the Internet, it would make them more accountable for their actions and encourage them to think twice before they do anything stupid.
I've been e-mail bombed a few times before. It's not a fun ordeal, especially if you're trying to sift through the debris to find important messages. Only a few times was I able to trace the person who did it (mainly through an IP address or whatever). Other times, I have been out of luck. Requiring Internet users to be licensed would help to make people responsible for their actions and be held culpable for them. Just like the driver of a car can be held responsible for ramming into someone else, so an Internet user should be held responsible for e-mail bombing someone.
Also, if there were an Internet licensing test, it would end up eliminating about 95% of AOL's user base ;o)
awkwardone
As Bob Dole, one-time Presidential candidate and now poster boy for Erectile Dysfunction and Viagra once said, "It's time for the government to pinch pennies instead of the American citizens!"
Our money goes towards some of the dumbest things. I heard something about government-sponsored studies to see what causes male sexual arousal or something like that... kind of a segue with the whole Bob Dole thing ;o)
oneworld.net - for all the latest WTO summit news.
awkwardone
My sentiments exactly. See my earlier comment for my interpretation of the situation :o)
awkwardone
Why would Microsoft want to kiss up to the World Trade Organisation (WTO)? They're not the ones that are bringing monopoly charges against them.
If Microsoft were to try and win the favor of anyone, they'd go for Uncle Sam. They're the ones that Microsoft has to deal with right now...
awkwardone
Somehow I don't think real-life person-to-person interactions and transactions are going away anytime soon. Some things *need* to be done in person, like depositing a paycheck. I, for one, would not want to buy golf clubs online because I want to check out how they feel and how well I can hit the ball with them before I buy them. Regardless of how much we can do online, people still like to talk to a human (especially when they call for technical support) ;o)
Even if face-to-face interaction *is* going away, this "moratorium" can always be lifted. Then, the government can tax to its heart's content. Until then, keeping Internet transactions tax-free is certainly the way to go.
awkwardone
Possibly. But how can this be regulated? Remember, the Internet is a vast and often confusing complex which is hard enough to regulate already. Uncle Sam has already failed in regulating Internet content with the (expletive) Communications Decency Act. I'm not sure how countries can monitor transactions done over the Internet and tax them accordingly.
Of course, to avoid tariffs, vendors and consumers could "smuggle" items between nations by conducting "unofficial" transactions under the nose of both governments involved, and get away with it. I can't imagine any *reputable* online vendors doing this, but you never know...
awkwardone
It's about time that Microsoft came up with a good proposal for the World Trade Organisation (WTO) summit in Seattle this week.
Regulating international commerce via the Internet would be a rather tricky endeavour anyways. Sometimes, a company is based in one nation while that company's Web host is in another country. Attempting to impose import/export duties on online transactions would pose a great difficulty because the transaction takes place in a different country from the company's home country, and it must be shipped to yet *another* country (whew!). Microsoft's idea is a very good one, and I hope that the delegates at the summit will be open to it despite the legal troubles Microsoft is dealing with now.
So, Microsoft (the company) isn't all bad (excepting the fact that it's an abusive monopoly), but I still hate Windoze...
For more information about the World Trade Organisation (WTO) summit, visit oneworld.net for up-to-date news and views.
awkwardone
Hey man, I want to use Linux, but my brother either hasn't had the time to hook me up with Linux or doesn't want to. I used Linux for a short time, but I didn't really know what I was doing. Now, a year later, I think I know more than I used to and I could use it as a good desktop operating system.
I don't want to be thought of as a Dino or whatever that is... I hate Windoze.
awkwardone
True. This would mean that if I went on a message board about Bayer and said, "Bayer rises from the ashes of 12,000,000 Jews, Catholics, Gypsies, Poles, Slavs, and handicapped people," I could be censored. Even though my comments contain truth (to this day Bayer still has lawsuits against it regarding their use of humans as laboratory animals), Bayer might object to what I say.
The same principle applies if I say that Adolf Hitler invented the economy car ("Volkswagen" means "People's Car" in German).
This just all sounds too 1984-ish to me.
awkwardone
ICQ: 13709677
You can't jump without a
Thank you for the link. Unfortunately, it seems to have been Slashdotted to death. I can't reach it right now :-(
.net.
awkwardone
ICQ: 13709677
You can't jump without a
The schools say they don't have the money to spend on more than one or two computer classes, and they have to target those classes to the majority of [semi-computer-illiterate] students. "How to use Windows 95 and M$ Office" and such.
.net.
You think that's bad? In our local public school system, the eighth grade computer curriculum revolves around teaching students how to use Windows Help, of all things. They learn how to learn how to use Windows, of all OSes. Are there any worse CS curricula around?
awkwardone
ICQ: 13709677
You can't jump without a
Of course, this system is good for convenience, but it could certainly be abused by a big government agency that likes to snoop...
---- Joseph Bowden
ICQ: 13709677
Want to contact me via e-mail?
It is News for Nerds, and it is stuff that matters. We nerds thrive on freedom of speech and freedom of expression, and we also like the ability to make our own choices. We don't like it when people trample on our rights and take away the fundamental freedoms that we have. I don't want any government agency determining what is and what isn't appropriate material. I am an intelligent human being and I can make choices for myself. I don't want the government to tell me what I can and can't see or listen to.
Likewise, if you don't want to read what you don't consider "news for nerds", then just DON'T READ IT! Ignore it! Again, you can filter this out on your user preferences page. You can make that choice, and the government won't have anything to do with it.
---- Joseph Bowden
ICQ: 13709677
Want to contact me via e-mail?
Why not just post anonymous people's IP, so they will either register or fear the threat of being harassed by people?
This is a good idea, as it leaves people accountable for their actions and takes away a bit of the sense of anonymity. This would definitely work well for anyone who has a static IP address (some people on cable modems, and a few others).
But herein lies the problem, as has been said by others: What about dynamic IP addresses? Sometimes IP addresses are switched around (which I think most dial-in users have whenever they dial in, they get a new IP address). So all they really have to do is disconnect from their ISP, then reconnect with a new IP address and continue their reign of terror on
The idea of posting IP addresses is a good one, but there are, as I've said, ways to circumvent it.
---- Joseph Bowden
ICQ: 13709677
Want to contact me via e-mail?
First of all, limiting things by IP is not always the best solution. I would hazard a guess to say that 80%+ of all /. readers use dynamic IPs. Not to mention the significant portion of folks who access the site from behind a firewall. With dynamic IPs, its possible for someone to get screwed just because they are on the same ISP as a troll, for instance.
Certainly, I agree with this. It's like with a K-line on IRC. Sometimes you are banned from an IRC server because of the actions of ONE person from your network. At one point the ISP I use (MediaOne Road Runner) was K-lined by Undernet thanks to a lamer's idiocy. So if you try to ban IP addresses, innocent people end up getting shut out because of one person's lameness.
Secondly, I personally do not like the idea of AC posts in the first place.
Amen. It lets a person remain unaccountable for their actions. They can do whatever they damn well please, and they won't have to answer to anyone for what they do. It's like a hit-and-run.
So I would recommend putting together a system that limits the number of AC posts either by some sort of quota system or (and I contradict myself here)
I don't personally favor the idea of quotas. If you use quotas, then some people will get shut out of legitimate commenting only because they got to an article after the quota had been filled. And those who had filled the quota could have been trolls.
This seems to be a difficult situation to fix, and there are many different solutions. They all have their ups and downs. Somehow /. needs to find a happy medium to keep the trolling problem to an absolute minimum and to satisfy everyone.
---- Joseph Bowden
ICQ: 13709677
Want to contact me via e-mail?