I was all set to call you insightful, until I remembered that I don't sit staring at my download window while 700MB iso images download. Well, ok I spend some time doing that, but not the full hour. I also don't stare at the burn window. When the burn is done, the disc pops out. I'd say downloading and burning takes up no more than 5 minutes of my time. The rest of that hour is spent doing other work. And sadly I don't get paid $240/hour.
Plus there's the combination of driving to the store or searching the site, purchasing, driving home or waiting for delivery, opening the packaging, etc.
I can't see Best Buy selling many of these at all. Then again, it's not bad at all if they do. I just wonder if $20 is really how much the media and processing costs.
...putting people out of jobs is not a nice thing to do, either.
And monopolies cannot employ as many people as a collection of competing companies, and they cannot provide as many solutions.
Why is it that people can't see that the end goal of competition is not just one single winner?
Seems to me that monopolies CAN employ more people than a collection of competing companies. As a monopoly they don't have to worry about being lean enough to weather the competition. In addition, it seems to me that a monopoly can provide more solutions than a collection of competitors as, again, they don't have to worry about the competition and are more able to expand their interests without worrying that it will take them down.
Granted, a monopoly isn't duplicating the effort of a collection of competitors and is likely to employ more than one competitor, but fewer than many. This all depends on the size of the monopoly and their market, but it's not unfathomable for me to imagine a monopoly which employs more bodies than the collective workforce of their would be or extinct competitors. Also, a monopoly in one market doesn't translate directly to a monopoly in another so I can see your point about providing multiple solutions. That said, Microsoft has shown us that a monopoly in one area CAN aid your success in another (ignoring antitrust, etc).
You're absolutely correct though that capitalist competition is not a zero sum game.
right, instead of 10 or 20 bucks maybe twice a year for software upgrades, you only have to pay $60 bucks a month for at least 2 years to get those upgrades FOR FREE!!!!
I see no difference, even given your additions. The only modification is that the Internet can be faster and is generally more widely available.
If there were a library on every corner, including phone banks willing to answer questions at will, we'd be at almost the same argument.
Libraries hold status because they're seen as a limited resource and also have a reputation of value.
Any idiot with a connection can post their opinion online and any idiot with money can publish a book. The difference is that the cost of entry is lower and that's a good thing.
I assumed the misspelling was one part of a larger steganographic message. Let it be known that I am now browsing over your comment history looking for further "mistakes".
Right, so fewer than 10 million, but more than zero because the day with the most number of downloads will have at least 1 (worst case scenario each user downloads consecutively and the servers allow 1 download per day).
What part of "less than 10 million, but obviously greater than zero" doesn't jive with "not all 10 million get patches on the same day"?
yeah, The X-Files should totally have done an episode where it turns out that the Tunguska event was the land fall of aliens. They could even call the episode Tunguska!
So, in sum, does Solipsism get you anything aside from your view of the world?
I get the feeling it's one of those "I can't prove this, you can't disprove it and it doesn't provide any real insight on the world, or otherwise affect how I act, but it's my world view, I like it, and it makes sense to me" things.
I think the big problem with Solipsism is that it ISN'T falsifiable. The original case that "my" mind is the only one is no more testable than the idea that the FSM created the world from His Noodly Appendage 8 minutes ago, complete with memories and history. Why does it have to be falsifiable to be correct? Materialism isn't falsifiable yet most athiests are materialists and no ones complaining about their theory of the universe. It has to be falsifiable in order to be proven. If something isn't falsifiable, it isn't worth considering, other than as thought experiment. You've basically accepted that Solipsism is no more feasible than the idea that all of existence was created 5 minutes ago and we or our minds were filled with false memories. Of what value is a method of pursuing knowledge that cannot actually provide any real information about the world?
Your version where the universal mind (is this some sort of connected consciousness, a connecting "energy", what?) is the only thing to exist is no more testable. Any hypothetical test which MIGHT falsify the idea is explained away as the universal mind having provided that result. I believe there are other minds. I believe there might be aliens who have minds that are more self aware than us. I'm not someone who is so inside my own thinking that I think I'm the only thing in the universe with thoughts. Even if I think my thoughts matter the most, I recognize that other living things in the universe that look similar to me might have similar kinds of thoughts, and the evidence seems to prove that yes, you do have a mind. I know this because I can communicate with you and you don't respond like a computer does. Just because I pass the Turing Test doesn't mean I'm not a computer. You've never actually met me. I might be one person, I might be a group of 20. I might actually be a random number generator that by pure probability has provided this response. You can most likely discount that idea, but given a long enough timeline the probability eventually reaches inevitability.
These are cute ideas to throw around, but they don't supply any progress towards actually understanding the world. And the idea of materialism is any different? The difference is, I'm not a materialist, I believe matter is more like a fake dreamlike material that we mold in our image, like clay, but I don't believe it's more real that the thoughts we use t mold and shape it. Are you really saying that the idea that matter is a "dreamlike material that we mold [with our minds]" has ANY validity. An extraordinary claim like that needs to be backed up with some pretty extraordinary evidence. Much more than just "it fits my unique world view".
Science isn't concerned with things such as this and I don't know that it's valid for you to claim that science is therefore somehow supporting Solipsism and your universal mind. I never said science answers the whys. Science is just how we organize the information. Solipsism is how we interpret the information. And the interpretation is more important than anything else. Cool, does this apply to everything else too? Is the art viewer more important than the art itself? Is the reader more important than the writer? Am I more important than you because I actually exist and you're just some construct of my mind? (on that note, in the Solipsist universe, how do you know that you exist and aren't just an elaborate simulation from my mind?)
The thing is, Science isn't just how we organize the information. Science is how we gather the information. It's how we interpret the information. Solipsism is how you come up with an idea that allows you to ignore the science because it's just a construct of your (or a collective) mind and no more valid than anything.
{{Citation Needed}} And then we have...
The same thing that makes people think the US Gov was sneaky enough to pull off the 9/11 attacks, but not enough to hide the mountains of evidence. Without a citation. Yeah, apparently they really were that sneaky, because I haven't come across a molehill of evidence, let alone a mountain, let alone multiple mountains. I was never saying they WERE sneaky enough, in fact I was saying there's no evidence for it. I'm saying there's no evidence for any conspiracy, but that hasn't stopped people from claiming there was a conspiracy. My favorite are the claims that the lack of evidence is all the evidence they need to prove a conspiracy.
I still would like a reference for the Air Force claiming that they did spread rumors regarding aliens as a means of covering experimental programs.
I think the big problem with Solipsism is that it ISN'T falsifiable. The original case that "my" mind is the only one is no more testable than the idea that the FSM created the world from His Noodly Appendage 8 minutes ago, complete with memories and history.
Your version where the universal mind (is this some sort of connected consciousness, a connecting "energy", what?) is the only thing to exist is no more testable. Any hypothetical test which MIGHT falsify the idea is explained away as the universal mind having provided that result.
These are cute ideas to throw around, but they don't supply any progress towards actually understanding the world.
To be honest, I think straight Solipsism sounds a whole lot more plausible than your "universal mind". If everything is a simulation created by our minds then what, other than some desire to not be alone, makes you think I'm not just another thread in that simulation?
Also, no one is suggesting anything exists outside of reality. It seems to me that you're suggesting that reality doesn't exist.
This seems little more than a thought experiment claiming that in order to save processor cycles, the Universal Simulation Machine doesn't render what no one is looking at, touching, smelling, hearing, etc. So indeed, if no one and no experiment is observing something, how do you know it hasn't ceased to exist and will be recreated when it is re-experienced again? You can't.
Science isn't concerned with things such as this and I don't know that it's valid for you to claim that science is therefore somehow supporting Solipsism and your universal mind.
The AF came out a few years ago and admitted to spreading rumors about aliens in Roswell and other places to cover up their experimental aircraft projects. {{Citation Needed}}
As an intelligence analyst with a top secret and above clearance (some of the classifications have names which are themselves classified) working in "the system", I'm pretty sure there's not much more. Then you're also aware that clearance isn't equal to having the password to "ze secret filez". There's also that whole "Need to Know" thing and your name is on the "Posts to Slashdot / Won't Get to Know" list.
What makes anyone think the US government is competent enough to pull off a conspiracy? The same thing that makes people think the US Gov was sneaky enough to pull off the 9/11 attacks, but not enough to hide the mountains of evidence.
Wow, I fit a 9/11 reference in, is this the new Godwin?
The explosives are part of the rocket boosters, which are dropped before entering orbit. Columbia broke up on reentry due to a hole in the edge of the wing caused by a piece of the insulating foam from the external tank.
First round you have to grab one jack. Second round, two. And so on. I'm afraid I'll need at least one more data point to start extrapolating your "And so on" with any degree of accuracy.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoa, whoa, whoa... You went to a Pixar film not realizing that there would be a short before it? What rock have you been living under?
I was all set to call you insightful, until I remembered that I don't sit staring at my download window while 700MB iso images download. Well, ok I spend some time doing that, but not the full hour.
I also don't stare at the burn window. When the burn is done, the disc pops out.
I'd say downloading and burning takes up no more than 5 minutes of my time. The rest of that hour is spent doing other work. And sadly I don't get paid $240/hour.
Plus there's the combination of driving to the store or searching the site, purchasing, driving home or waiting for delivery, opening the packaging, etc.
I can't see Best Buy selling many of these at all. Then again, it's not bad at all if they do. I just wonder if $20 is really how much the media and processing costs.
Thompson was vocal, not Nixon, Thompson.
And Apple hasn't shipped a PPC box since 2006.
You're wrong anyway as Hardy is available for PPC: http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ports/releases/8.04/release/
Oh, you meant UbunUtu. Yeah, I haven't seen a PPC Ubunutu release in ages.
...putting people out of jobs is not a nice thing to do, either.
And monopolies cannot employ as many people as a collection of competing companies, and they cannot provide as many solutions.
Why is it that people can't see that the end goal of competition is not just one single winner?
Seems to me that monopolies CAN employ more people than a collection of competing companies. As a monopoly they don't have to worry about being lean enough to weather the competition. In addition, it seems to me that a monopoly can provide more solutions than a collection of competitors as, again, they don't have to worry about the competition and are more able to expand their interests without worrying that it will take them down.Granted, a monopoly isn't duplicating the effort of a collection of competitors and is likely to employ more than one competitor, but fewer than many. This all depends on the size of the monopoly and their market, but it's not unfathomable for me to imagine a monopoly which employs more bodies than the collective workforce of their would be or extinct competitors.
Also, a monopoly in one market doesn't translate directly to a monopoly in another so I can see your point about providing multiple solutions. That said, Microsoft has shown us that a monopoly in one area CAN aid your success in another (ignoring antitrust, etc).
You're absolutely correct though that capitalist competition is not a zero sum game.
Right, just pointing out that it's not such a straight comparison of the two products and the requirements for receiving the update.
right, instead of 10 or 20 bucks maybe twice a year for software upgrades, you only have to pay $60 bucks a month for at least 2 years to get those upgrades FOR FREE!!!!
Ever cracked an encyclopedia?
I see no difference, even given your additions. The only modification is that the Internet can be faster and is generally more widely available.
If there were a library on every corner, including phone banks willing to answer questions at will, we'd be at almost the same argument.
Libraries hold status because they're seen as a limited resource and also have a reputation of value.
Any idiot with a connection can post their opinion online and any idiot with money can publish a book. The difference is that the cost of entry is lower and that's a good thing.
not even http://growl.info/ ?
hang your head in shame.
I assumed the misspelling was one part of a larger steganographic message. Let it be known that I am now browsing over your comment history looking for further "mistakes".
I'm on to you.
Right, so fewer than 10 million, but more than zero because the day with the most number of downloads will have at least 1 (worst case scenario each user downloads consecutively and the servers allow 1 download per day).
What part of "less than 10 million, but obviously greater than zero" doesn't jive with "not all 10 million get patches on the same day"?
yeah, The X-Files should totally have done an episode where it turns out that the Tunguska event was the land fall of aliens. They could even call the episode Tunguska!
heh
catamaroon
hehe
catamaroon
So, in sum, does Solipsism get you anything aside from your view of the world?
I get the feeling it's one of those "I can't prove this, you can't disprove it and it doesn't provide any real insight on the world, or otherwise affect how I act, but it's my world view, I like it, and it makes sense to me" things.
The thing is, Science isn't just how we organize the information. Science is how we gather the information. It's how we interpret the information. Solipsism is how you come up with an idea that allows you to ignore the science because it's just a construct of your (or a collective) mind and no more valid than anything.
I still would like a reference for the Air Force claiming that they did spread rumors regarding aliens as a means of covering experimental programs.
I think the big problem with Solipsism is that it ISN'T falsifiable. The original case that "my" mind is the only one is no more testable than the idea that the FSM created the world from His Noodly Appendage 8 minutes ago, complete with memories and history.
Your version where the universal mind (is this some sort of connected consciousness, a connecting "energy", what?) is the only thing to exist is no more testable. Any hypothetical test which MIGHT falsify the idea is explained away as the universal mind having provided that result.
These are cute ideas to throw around, but they don't supply any progress towards actually understanding the world.
To be honest, I think straight Solipsism sounds a whole lot more plausible than your "universal mind". If everything is a simulation created by our minds then what, other than some desire to not be alone, makes you think I'm not just another thread in that simulation?
Also, no one is suggesting anything exists outside of reality. It seems to me that you're suggesting that reality doesn't exist.
This seems little more than a thought experiment claiming that in order to save processor cycles, the Universal Simulation Machine doesn't render what no one is looking at, touching, smelling, hearing, etc. So indeed, if no one and no experiment is observing something, how do you know it hasn't ceased to exist and will be recreated when it is re-experienced again? You can't.
Science isn't concerned with things such as this and I don't know that it's valid for you to claim that science is therefore somehow supporting Solipsism and your universal mind.
As an intelligence analyst with a top secret and above clearance (some of the classifications have names which are themselves classified) working in "the system", I'm pretty sure there's not much more. Then you're also aware that clearance isn't equal to having the password to "ze secret filez". There's also that whole "Need to Know" thing and your name is on the "Posts to Slashdot / Won't Get to Know" list.
What makes anyone think the US government is competent enough to pull off a conspiracy? The same thing that makes people think the US Gov was sneaky enough to pull off the 9/11 attacks, but not enough to hide the mountains of evidence.
Wow, I fit a 9/11 reference in, is this the new Godwin?
The explosives are part of the rocket boosters, which are dropped before entering orbit.
Columbia broke up on reentry due to a hole in the edge of the wing caused by a piece of the insulating foam from the external tank.
This does not stand up to examination.
You sure you want only ONE equal sign in there?
Yeah, my spell checker works by regular expressions and only flags items that don't match. It's really simple too.
.*