been listening to your network guys again eh? Dark Fiber is the fiber that's not being used...I get your point though -- assuming it's "we thought we had enough capacity for anything." Who knows -- you might haev had the capacity -- but you couldn't bring it online...
Although I agree the MackFramework has the most potential of the 87 web frameworks that want to surplant Rails, it's not ready for Prime Time yet. In a couple of months, maybe, but for right now, I'd still use Rails for a professional project.
Do I personally want to make significant changes in corporate America to redistribute wealth more equally? Yes.
Tried to slip that one in eh? Liberty and Equality exist on a balance scale -- the more liberty an individual has, the less equality there is because one person will use their liberty to become unequal. There is a necessary balance, and in particular we try to make sure that people start with a roughly equal opportunity -- I know it's not perfect -- some people use their liberty to provide their offspring/favorites with a better than equal chance at wealth and/or happiness
The point is that our system is predicated upon giving people as much liberty as possible, without allowing them to directly negatively impact someone elses liberty. In cases where indirect actions are hurting others liberties or allowing terrible inequalities to exist, then the people must act to curtail the individual, but with as little interference as possible.
If you allow the state to "redistribute" wealth as it sees socially necessary, you'll soon find the state is redistributing social liberties as it sees necessary. We've seen that the ability to win an election is no indication of the ability to actually lead. So lets not ever give government excessive powers in "redistributing wealth."
Fortunately, it's very easy personally make a significant change in the wealth distribution. Do it yourself. I have arranged my schedule so I work 4 10 hour days M-TH, and Friday I work for charity. Is that somewhat selfish: 1 day for charity and 2 days for me? I suppose so, but it's enough to put me at peace that I am doing "my bit" for goodness. I'm not doing anything crazy like working in a soup kitchen either -- because that would be like sticking my head in the sand. Fridays I code for my conscience for contracts. All the money I make on Fridays goes to the UNCF because they helped me get where I am. And I admit -- it IS selfish, because I pat myself on the back at the end of every completed contract and say "good for you."
I will never ask anyone to give up their liberty for me or mine. And I will never ask anyone to work towards a greater good -- because I don't believe that you can force morality on someone (and you don't want to start trying, because they you give them permission to force their morality on you if they can just win an election). If you want to make the world a better place -- do so through your actions. I find that I convert more people to my cause by living my life that I could ever hope to convert by TALKING to them. I know that my actions have inspired a few people to find a way to give what they can. If we all did that -- took action instead of complaining -- we'd get MUCH more done towards our goals. There will always be people who take advantage of such a situation, and there will always be people who complain that things are unfair. My personal creedo is to watch the extremists (on both sides) to make sure they are not really making any impact, and live my life as I would like to see others living -- by DOING to help others rather than TALKING. Call me naive, but I don't think that people don't need massive organization or end of the work hysteria to act for the good of their brothers/sisters. All they need is an example.
I think what you said ignores what the OP means when he says it's a privacy issue, and not a computing one. Data is not good/evil. It's just data. And I agree that the wrong data can bias a person -- which is why we have laws about what can be introduced as evidence in courts -- somethings should not be considered in certain decision.
Privacy is a much bigger issue than computing. We cleanse a person's credit account of information over 7 years old -- but we did that LONG before computers existed. Instead of trying to come up with some half-assed way to protect privacy by saying "people should forget stuff" we need to actually say "people have a right to privacy that must be protected."
The fact that people have to live with what they put on their myspace/facebook/blog 20 years down the line doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that that should be considered relevant for getting a loan/job/insurance etc.
Although OpenDNS has saved me from several typos, I don't think that eliminates the need to sue Cybersquatters who are making money my intercepting traffic that was intended to go elsewhere. The fact there is an industry churing out sites like espnn.com is like a city putting up a delibierately misleading sign on a highway that diverted people onto a toll road (although I swear that's the way the GW Bridge is set up).
It's been obvious to people who "work" with linux, that Ubuntu is trying to be the friendly, cool, slick linux, and portray other distros as the geeks. Just like high school. Of course just like real life, there are more geeks than you realize and they are a lot more productive than the "slick" people. To counter this, the slick people employ marketing science -- which actually has nothing to do with marketing or science -- it's just lying about the other guy to make yourself look good.
I don't have a problem with Ubuntu, and I quite appreciate what they are trying to do in usability, but to pretend that they are the most popular linux distro is (quite literally) belittling of the others.
Good lord, how is this innovation in anything except crapiness? Office 2007 is the opposite of ODF, which is the wave of the future in documents. Fighting against the community for profit is hardly innovative -- MSFT has been doing it for years.
I actually had not been to Helium in several months, because although I too liked the idea, the content there was dominated by foreign writers looking to make a quick $.35, which probably went a long way in their native land. The problem with that was that they were flooding the site with very poor content.
I was pleasantly surprised to follow your link and see that things have changed quite dramatically. I actually may send the basic computer security article to some people as a first line of answer their questions (seeing as I'm IT to everyone who even remotely knows me).
Quick technical question: when you say broadcast, I don't understand what you mean. How can the front end machine communicate with X number of backend machines without knowing about their existence? I'm not a networking guy, but I thought TCP packets required one and only one IP address.
Aside from that technical hurdle, I like where you're going with this, but I'd want to take it a step further. Put all the software on a CD, like a variation of Ubuntu's live CD, or whatever OS you want, as long is it's on an unalterable media. Then the local election committees jobs would be to verify the disks that would be used as the OS in the voting machines. They could verify/certify the disks both before and after the election.
Likewise store the data on a non-editable media. I'm not a hardware guy either, but I'm sure it must be possible to incrementally write data to a CD-R, which could then only be altered by destroying the data. That would make recounts pretty easy too.
I also like the idea of a paper receipt, but you can't trust the voters to hang on to those. After they validate their votes on the DB machines (say with a printed bar code on the receipt with the "ID" of their vote), they have to surrender the receipt to the election officials. One more check at the end of the evening -- do the total number of reciepts collected equal teh total number of votes each recorded says were cast.
You hit the nail right on the head with the price reduction being the key. They did that deliberately to get numbers like that that they hoped would be misinterpreted.
What the RIAA is all about is controling what choices you have in music. If you can only get the CD's that they distribute, they can force anything down your throat. If you can download any artist's music, the artist has much more power, and the labels much less. The RIAA would love to end all downloading of music -- because right now Apple is making money off of ITunes, and they are offering all sorts of music -- music the labels would just as soon you not be allowed to hear.
...Without copyright there would be no real reason to write a book, a song or a program for anything other than personal use...
There would be no monetary reason. But as an occasional singer of songs, I can tell you I get alot of joy out of entertaining. And at least for me, I get a huge rush when I here/see someone singing a song I wrote -- it could not happen enough for me! There is art in performance.
...totally abolishing it would be comparable to deciding that you don't want politicians to govern you and fighting for anarchy instead...
Ugh, I actually wept out of despair when I read this. Not wanting politicians to govern you is not the same as wanting anarchy. I'd be in favor of government in which I had a voice. but there is no such thing as a community of 280 Million people. I'm not naive enough to not understand that "evil" can organize into large enough numbers that "good" has to similarly organize -- I even support a federal government that has some power -- but when the government can take your house to put up a shopping mall and arrest you for not showing your papers to a government official on demand...things have gone too far. Resistance to that sort of government does not mean that you're seeking anarchy.
There is a perception that there is no legitimate reason for violating the DMCA, and that people who are doing this are selfish. Think what you want, but I have an anonymous friend who spends uncompensated hours a week ACTIVELY opposing copyright law by breaking it. He's not doing it for shits and giggles. He's doing it because he thinks copyright is morally wrong. I'm gonna throw some Thoreau at you:
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men, generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to put out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?...
As for adopting the ways of the State has provided for remedying the evil, I know not of such ways. They take too much time, and a man's life will be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came into this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to live in, but to live in it, be it good or bad. A man has not everything to do, but something; and because he cannot do everything, it is not necessary that he should be petitioning the Governor or the Legislature any more than it is theirs to petition me; and if they should not hear my petition, what should I do then? But in this case the State has provided no way: its very Constitution is the evil. This may seem to be harsh and stubborn and unconcilliatory; but it is to treat with the utmost kindness and consideration the only spirit that can appreciate or deserves it. So is all change for the better, like birth and death, which convulse the body.
There are certainly people who are ripping music/movies/software for kicks, their own usage, or to share with friends/family -- but they are not part of my scene. I'm doing it because I do not support the idea of intellectual property. Period. Call me an extremist if you will, I think my ideas are less radical than most of the people demonstrating in the media for this that and the other.
I think that anything man can think of he should share with his fellow man. I should get paid for my service, and my labor, but I completely disapprove of people OWNING ideas. Millions die each year because of patents on medicine. Millions live in poverty because of their lack of access (no pun intended) to productivity enhancing machinery and software. I don't know that anyone dies because they can't hear the latest Kanye West song, but I object tot he fact that the industry deliberately surpresses musicians whose ideas are not "commercial" enough. I'm convinced that powerful media companies war against media they do not/cannot own, and this affects us because we are limited in our choices to whom the powerful media companies are willing to present to us.
And they do this because of the money involved. Only by making their products equally (in)valuable to the products that I want access too, can I be assured of access to everything. I think the system is broken, and the only way it can be repaired is to demonstrate to everyone how actually broken it is. I am doing what I can to bring down the system.
Call me a jackass all you want -- I think of myself as a citizen. This is my civil disobedience. There are others like me, and considering the damage one person can do to copyrights, with our infantile technology now -- imagine how much damage we can do to copyright in 20 years, with 100 recruits. P2P now is about gaining those recruits, but eventually, we WILL crush copyright.
I read your links, I read his links. I don't understand from your links where it says that the government can't be sued unless they want to be? Can you give a better link than that? Unless what your saying is that the Government may use as a defense "It's not our fault" but then they are still being sued aren't they? Isn't the defense against EVERY suit, "we're not responsible?"
the defintion of being a nerd is that you don't know much outside of your area of exertise. For most nerds, that means missing out on updates to popular culture -- which is what podcasting is. Unless you were intersted in podcasting from a technical standpoint, why would you know about it before it had any good content?
It is amazing how many "30 day treatement" centers there are, and how they are convenient priced at around $10k-$15k. Just what a middle class family can afford if they scrape together EVERYTHING. I know there are a few of those centers that contain dedicated health professionals, but I have to agree with the poster, that you're MUCH better off going to a 12 step program than to a place where you're going to be put through exactly the same program, but be 15k poorer afterwards.
Slashdot Mirror
been listening to your network guys again eh? Dark Fiber is the fiber that's not being used...I get your point though -- assuming it's "we thought we had enough capacity for anything." Who knows -- you might haev had the capacity -- but you couldn't bring it online...
Although I agree the MackFramework has the most potential of the 87 web frameworks that want to surplant Rails, it's not ready for Prime Time yet. In a couple of months, maybe, but for right now, I'd still use Rails for a professional project.
To make it easier for the kids:
select concat(char(0x46),char(0x69),char(0x72),char(0x73),char(0x74),char(0x20),char(0x50),char(0x6f),char(0x73),char(0x74),char(0x21))
Do I personally want to make significant changes in corporate America to redistribute wealth more equally? Yes.
Tried to slip that one in eh? Liberty and Equality exist on a balance scale -- the more liberty an individual has, the less equality there is because one person will use their liberty to become unequal. There is a necessary balance, and in particular we try to make sure that people start with a roughly equal opportunity -- I know it's not perfect -- some people use their liberty to provide their offspring/favorites with a better than equal chance at wealth and/or happiness
The point is that our system is predicated upon giving people as much liberty as possible, without allowing them to directly negatively impact someone elses liberty. In cases where indirect actions are hurting others liberties or allowing terrible inequalities to exist, then the people must act to curtail the individual, but with as little interference as possible.
If you allow the state to "redistribute" wealth as it sees socially necessary, you'll soon find the state is redistributing social liberties as it sees necessary. We've seen that the ability to win an election is no indication of the ability to actually lead. So lets not ever give government excessive powers in "redistributing wealth."
Fortunately, it's very easy personally make a significant change in the wealth distribution. Do it yourself. I have arranged my schedule so I work 4 10 hour days M-TH, and Friday I work for charity. Is that somewhat selfish: 1 day for charity and 2 days for me? I suppose so, but it's enough to put me at peace that I am doing "my bit" for goodness. I'm not doing anything crazy like working in a soup kitchen either -- because that would be like sticking my head in the sand. Fridays I code for my conscience for contracts. All the money I make on Fridays goes to the UNCF because they helped me get where I am. And I admit -- it IS selfish, because I pat myself on the back at the end of every completed contract and say "good for you."
I will never ask anyone to give up their liberty for me or mine. And I will never ask anyone to work towards a greater good -- because I don't believe that you can force morality on someone (and you don't want to start trying, because they you give them permission to force their morality on you if they can just win an election). If you want to make the world a better place -- do so through your actions. I find that I convert more people to my cause by living my life that I could ever hope to convert by TALKING to them. I know that my actions have inspired a few people to find a way to give what they can. If we all did that -- took action instead of complaining -- we'd get MUCH more done towards our goals. There will always be people who take advantage of such a situation, and there will always be people who complain that things are unfair. My personal creedo is to watch the extremists (on both sides) to make sure they are not really making any impact, and live my life as I would like to see others living -- by DOING to help others rather than TALKING. Call me naive, but I don't think that people don't need massive organization or end of the work hysteria to act for the good of their brothers/sisters. All they need is an example.
If you want to help, be that example.
I think what you said ignores what the OP means when he says it's a privacy issue, and not a computing one. Data is not good/evil. It's just data. And I agree that the wrong data can bias a person -- which is why we have laws about what can be introduced as evidence in courts -- somethings should not be considered in certain decision.
Privacy is a much bigger issue than computing. We cleanse a person's credit account of information over 7 years old -- but we did that LONG before computers existed. Instead of trying to come up with some half-assed way to protect privacy by saying "people should forget stuff" we need to actually say "people have a right to privacy that must be protected."
The fact that people have to live with what they put on their myspace/facebook/blog 20 years down the line doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that that should be considered relevant for getting a loan/job/insurance etc.
Never hire a humble developer:
a ll141510.html
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/l/larryw
Although OpenDNS has saved me from several typos, I don't think that eliminates the need to sue Cybersquatters who are making money my intercepting traffic that was intended to go elsewhere. The fact there is an industry churing out sites like espnn.com is like a city putting up a delibierately misleading sign on a highway that diverted people onto a toll road (although I swear that's the way the GW Bridge is set up).
In a way, I think slashdot should take credit for this metric coming to pass.
It's been obvious to people who "work" with linux, that Ubuntu is trying to be the friendly, cool, slick linux, and portray other distros as the geeks. Just like high school. Of course just like real life, there are more geeks than you realize and they are a lot more productive than the "slick" people. To counter this, the slick people employ marketing science -- which actually has nothing to do with marketing or science -- it's just lying about the other guy to make yourself look good.
I don't have a problem with Ubuntu, and I quite appreciate what they are trying to do in usability, but to pretend that they are the most popular linux distro is (quite literally) belittling of the others.
Good lord, how is this innovation in anything except crapiness? Office 2007 is the opposite of ODF, which is the wave of the future in documents. Fighting against the community for profit is hardly innovative -- MSFT has been doing it for years.
I actually had not been to Helium in several months, because although I too liked the idea, the content there was dominated by foreign writers looking to make a quick $.35, which probably went a long way in their native land. The problem with that was that they were flooding the site with very poor content.
I was pleasantly surprised to follow your link and see that things have changed quite dramatically. I actually may send the basic computer security article to some people as a first line of answer their questions (seeing as I'm IT to everyone who even remotely knows me).
Quick technical question: when you say broadcast, I don't understand what you mean. How can the front end machine communicate with X number of backend machines without knowing about their existence? I'm not a networking guy, but I thought TCP packets required one and only one IP address.
Aside from that technical hurdle, I like where you're going with this, but I'd want to take it a step further. Put all the software on a CD, like a variation of Ubuntu's live CD, or whatever OS you want, as long is it's on an unalterable media. Then the local election committees jobs would be to verify the disks that would be used as the OS in the voting machines. They could verify/certify the disks both before and after the election.
Likewise store the data on a non-editable media. I'm not a hardware guy either, but I'm sure it must be possible to incrementally write data to a CD-R, which could then only be altered by destroying the data. That would make recounts pretty easy too.
I also like the idea of a paper receipt, but you can't trust the voters to hang on to those. After they validate their votes on the DB machines (say with a printed bar code on the receipt with the "ID" of their vote), they have to surrender the receipt to the election officials. One more check at the end of the evening -- do the total number of reciepts collected equal teh total number of votes each recorded says were cast.
What the RIAA is all about is controling what choices you have in music. If you can only get the CD's that they distribute, they can force anything down your throat. If you can download any artist's music, the artist has much more power, and the labels much less. The RIAA would love to end all downloading of music -- because right now Apple is making money off of ITunes, and they are offering all sorts of music -- music the labels would just as soon you not be allowed to hear.
why rip to harddrive? Why not to DVD? Cost $0.10 or so
There would be no monetary reason. But as an occasional singer of songs, I can tell you I get alot of joy out of entertaining. And at least for me, I get a huge rush when I here/see someone singing a song I wrote -- it could not happen enough for me! There is art in performance.
Ugh, I actually wept out of despair when I read this. Not wanting politicians to govern you is not the same as wanting anarchy. I'd be in favor of government in which I had a voice. but there is no such thing as a community of 280 Million people. I'm not naive enough to not understand that "evil" can organize into large enough numbers that "good" has to similarly organize -- I even support a federal government that has some power -- but when the government can take your house to put up a shopping mall and arrest you for not showing your papers to a government official on demand...things have gone too far. Resistance to that sort of government does not mean that you're seeking anarchy.
There are certainly people who are ripping music/movies/software for kicks, their own usage, or to share with friends/family -- but they are not part of my scene. I'm doing it because I do not support the idea of intellectual property. Period. Call me an extremist if you will, I think my ideas are less radical than most of the people demonstrating in the media for this that and the other.
I think that anything man can think of he should share with his fellow man. I should get paid for my service, and my labor, but I completely disapprove of people OWNING ideas. Millions die each year because of patents on medicine. Millions live in poverty because of their lack of access (no pun intended) to productivity enhancing machinery and software. I don't know that anyone dies because they can't hear the latest Kanye West song, but I object tot he fact that the industry deliberately surpresses musicians whose ideas are not "commercial" enough. I'm convinced that powerful media companies war against media they do not/cannot own, and this affects us because we are limited in our choices to whom the powerful media companies are willing to present to us.
And they do this because of the money involved. Only by making their products equally (in)valuable to the products that I want access too, can I be assured of access to everything. I think the system is broken, and the only way it can be repaired is to demonstrate to everyone how actually broken it is. I am doing what I can to bring down the system.
Call me a jackass all you want -- I think of myself as a citizen. This is my civil disobedience. There are others like me, and considering the damage one person can do to copyrights, with our infantile technology now -- imagine how much damage we can do to copyright in 20 years, with 100 recruits. P2P now is about gaining those recruits, but eventually, we WILL crush copyright.
We're here, we share. get used to it.
...My Bad... If you're sharing on p2p, there's no need to apologize to me.
I read your links, I read his links. I don't understand from your links where it says that the government can't be sued unless they want to be? Can you give a better link than that? Unless what your saying is that the Government may use as a defense "It's not our fault" but then they are still being sued aren't they? Isn't the defense against EVERY suit, "we're not responsible?"
you wrote:"If you want to kill yourself, that's YOUR choice. Not your mom's." Like Terry Schiavo eh?
I can make a new partition! I'm not allowed to use swap space though. I guess I don't control permissions though. I guess I'm not an admin
This seems unfair since I'm assuming you have admin privs on her box
the defintion of being a nerd is that you don't know much outside of your area of exertise. For most nerds, that means missing out on updates to popular culture -- which is what podcasting is. Unless you were intersted in podcasting from a technical standpoint, why would you know about it before it had any good content?
I'm sure other slashdotters can recommend a few good casts
What? You've never seen someone chose to watch Football rather than go shopping/go to a party/etc etc.
It is amazing how many "30 day treatement" centers there are, and how they are convenient priced at around $10k-$15k. Just what a middle class family can afford if they scrape together EVERYTHING. I know there are a few of those centers that contain dedicated health professionals, but I have to agree with the poster, that you're MUCH better off going to a 12 step program than to a place where you're going to be put through exactly the same program, but be 15k poorer afterwards.
an obligatory coral or google cache joke about this?