ALL of these assertions spring from the same underlying trope; namely, money/wealth = most important human development ever.
I stopped reading once I got to this strawman.
In the world the libertarians envision, where Insatiable Greed and Sociopathy have replaced Humanities and Fine Arts in all school curricula...
Ok, I lied. All the Capital Letters drew My Eyes to This Sentence.
It seems you've met very few libertarians, and somehow came up with this vision of us as some demonic robber barons beating the shit out of poor people with leatherbound copies of Atlas Shrugged.
The greed libertarians (even Rand) spoke of is more than just greed for money. A libertarian who values their child's education in the humanities and fine arts will seek it out, out of greed. Money is just a way to facilitate that -- I give someone else something they want (labor) so I can get what I want.
I'll speak to the advertising department about dropping the "greed" tagline. How about "freedom of choice"? It has a much nicer ring to it, doesn't it?
(Personally, that's one of my biggest beefs with Rand. I know what she meant by "greed", and she knew what she meant by "greed", but most people don't and don't want to have to sit through 1400 pages to find out. There had to be a better, less-loaded, term she could have used.)
There's a difference between not knowing how to write code for Hibernate and not understanding what a relational database is.
C-level managers are making decisions that effect the entire department under them, and set the direction of the company. It's fine if a CIO doesn't know the nuts & bolts of the technology in use, but they should at least understand the basic concepts. That's why things like CIO Magazine and CompTIA's i-Net+ certification exist. They boil down technologies to the essential things someone in that position needs to know.
They've honed their management & decision-making skills over the years. But they should have some clue about what it is they're managing, or else they're just a highly-paid suit in a fancy office.
Many CIOs today cut their teeth on the systems of yesterday, and have spent many years in middle and upper management since their days "in the trenches". They've gotten good at management, but they've lost touch with the day to day realities of what they're managing.
For example, a CIO I worked under advised us that we could increase the efficiency of our database-driven app by reading the records in a random-access manner, rather than processing the whole "file" of orders sequentially each time we wanted to retrieve a record.
Well, as a possible counter-argument, there was the MSX standard back in the 80s. But even then, different MSX manufacturers added their own twists to the machines in order to make them stand out. So, a game might have run on your low-end MSX2, but it wouldn't have had digital speech or 16-color sprites because it's not a Ronco SuperMSX2Deluxe.
I would like to compromise some and get these politicos off our backs before they do something truly draconian
That's what the ESRB was...a compromise. Ok, say we compromise on this current issue. What happens when another politician gets a bee in their bonnet? Do we compromise again? If we keep that up, we'll end up in the same spot as if we gave in at the start, but we'll be able to pat ourselves on the back for being so willing to make compromises along the way. We'll probably come out of it feeling like victors.
Did you ever see that cheesy Michael Keaton movie "Gung Ho", where he's in charge of the auto plant? There's a scene at the end where the Japanese owners are berating the quality of the cars (some of which were literally falling apart, missing windshields, etc.) and Keaton says he would rather have one of those cars than a better car from the Japanese plant. Why? Because it was built by his friends and co-workers, who he got to see pouring their blood, sweat, and tears into those cars.
I read the same kind of sentiment into Allchin's quote. He works for Microsoft, and probably thinks it would be a slap in the face to his co-workers were he to strut around with a MacBook. At least, that's probably what I'd be feeling if I were in his shoes.
Why would Rand care about something done for this nebulous "everyone", especially when no one pays for it?
Good point:)
Let's try phrasing it this way:
People with knowledge are creating a resource by which any individual who seeks knowledge may find it, and people are donating the fruits of their labors (money) to the WikiMedia Foundation because they value the dissemination of knowledge to those who value and crave it.
Wow...sounds wordy enough to be from the pages of Atlas Shrugged.
Rand would look at Wikipedia and shudder. Wikipedia is the embodiment of altruism.
I don't think there are people making sacrifices in their own lives to write Wikipedia entries, nor are there people holding guns to the other group making them write Wikipedia entries.
Rand would have loved Wikipedia, IMHO. It's the embodiment of *selfishness*, as she saw the meaning of the word:
People write Wikipedia entries voluntarily
They're building a storehouse of knowledge to make factual information available to everyone
For the most part, people write Wikipedia articles in their free time, instead of doing less productive things like playing video games or watching TV
(most) Article writers are doing it for no reason other than how good it makes them feel. You don't see people claiming moral superiority for how many Wikipedia articles they write, although they may point to an article they wrote and boast about the quality.
Great! How 'bout I say I'm you and crawl into bed with your wife tonight. After all, I'm you... I mean me because I say so, right?
An identity transaction involves three types of parties. There is a claiming party (you), a relying party (maxume's wife), and one or more vouching parties (you again). If maxume's wife doesn't know you, then she probably doesn't put a lot of trust in your claim or your vouching for it.
Even if you have a government-issued ID with your picture saying you were maxume, she still wouldn't trust it because she trusts her own senses to identify maxume more than she trusts someone else.
In your identity theft trial, the government (now the relying party) would likely ask her (now the vouching party) whether or not you are her spouse.
Rand was not opposed to someone giving food to a hungry person or a blanket to a freezing person. In fact, she didn't have any objection to charity (as she made clear in one of her Donahue interviews). She objected to the elevation of sacrifice as a virtue, the idea that you should give up your only blanket or food for another, and forced wealth redistribution which she considered to be slavery and which takes away the moral purity of the act of voluntary giving.
Any action that a man undertakes for the benefit of those he loves is not a sacrifice if, in the hierarchy of his values, in the total context of choices open to him, it achieves that which is of greatest personal (and rational) importance to him. (Rand 51)
If one's friend is in trouble, one should act to help him by whatever nonsacrificial means are appropriate. For instance, if one's friend is starving, it is not a sacrifice, but an act of integrity to give him money for food rather than buy some insignificant gadget for oneself, because his wefare is important in the scale of one's personal values. If the gadget means more than the friend's suffering, one had no business pretending to be his friend.
[. ..] What, then, should one properly grant to strangers? The generalized respect and good will which one should grant to a human being in the name of the potential value he represents -- until and unless he forfeits it. (Rand 53)
"The respect and good will that men of self-esteem feel toward other human beings is profoundly egoistic; they feel, in effect: 'Other men are of value because they are of the same species as myself.' In revering living entities, they are revering their own life. (Nathaniel Brandon, qtd. Rand 53)
Cite: Rand, Ayn. The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism. New York: Penguin Putnam, Inc. 1964.
I seem to remember that being mentioned on one of the TNG-era "behind the scenes" specials. They showed a big diagram of the ole' 1701-D and pointed out that there was only one bathroom, and it was just off the bridge, near Capt. Picard's ready room.
The Memory Alpha site back this up with an unsourced quote: "Presumably the adjacent corridor led to a bathroom, however it was never shown on camera and a set was never constructed."
Looking at Memory Alpha a bit further, it appears that every crew quarters had a bathroom as well. But, we never got to see it. It was always "behind that door over there".
Why the fuck are they going after the teacher when they SHOULD be going after the Spyware writer/vendor???
Our bloodlust says that a horrible act occurred, and someone must be punished, and it would take too much work to figure out who wrote the malware and bring them to trial (extradition treaties and all that). The teacher is right there. They know where she works, and they know where she lives.
Send the teacher up the river, and the parents can sleep soundly knowing a horrible person is safely behind bars.
I remember reading that Lucas was inspired by Flash Gordon and the like, those campy movie serials. The good guys wear white, the bad guys wear black, the rogue wears both...and I'm not sure how the stormtroopers or Chewbacca fit into this. There's action, suspense, romance, intrigue, and then the good guys win.
The 2004 "release" was a "developer preview", originally meant to get AmigaOS 4.0 hardware and software in the hands of the few remaining Amiga developers so they could start pumping out apps while the OS matured. The original AmigaOne boards were also meant as developer boards, with the intent of selling the platform as a mobile/PDA platform once everything was completed.
This new release is the "end user" release, meaning anything added to it after this point is a bug fix or "icing on the cake".
Re:Funeral ceremonies were held today for the Amig
on
AmigaOS 4.0 released
·
· Score: 1
Gary is a GAte aRraY in the ECS chipset, used for I/O & glue logic.
The main obstacle to getting AmigaOS ported to anything other than the AmigaOne is Amiga, Inc's licensing program. They license out the right for a board to carry the Amiga name and run AmigaOS, by virtue of a ROM "dongle" that gets integrated into the motherboard. This means that anything running AmigaOS has to be specifically designed to run AmigaOS. According to messages on the AmigaWorld.net and Amiga.org forums, the company hasn't been very good at getting back to the few people who have emailed them asking about licenses. I can't see value they see in holding such tight reigns on something with such a small market.
Then, there's the matter of developer documentation. The folks at Hyperion who are coding the OS want solid documentation for the hardware they're targeting. They don't want to just look at the Linux Mac code and just trust it works the way it should.
But that second point is largely irrelevant, as they'll never get the chance to do it given the current situation with Amiga, Inc.
Slashdot Mirror
I stopped reading once I got to this strawman.
Ok, I lied. All the Capital Letters drew My Eyes to This Sentence.
It seems you've met very few libertarians, and somehow came up with this vision of us as some demonic robber barons beating the shit out of poor people with leatherbound copies of Atlas Shrugged.
The greed libertarians (even Rand) spoke of is more than just greed for money. A libertarian who values their child's education in the humanities and fine arts will seek it out, out of greed. Money is just a way to facilitate that -- I give someone else something they want (labor) so I can get what I want.
I'll speak to the advertising department about dropping the "greed" tagline. How about "freedom of choice"? It has a much nicer ring to it, doesn't it?
(Personally, that's one of my biggest beefs with Rand. I know what she meant by "greed", and she knew what she meant by "greed", but most people don't and don't want to have to sit through 1400 pages to find out. There had to be a better, less-loaded, term she could have used.)
There's a difference between not knowing how to write code for Hibernate and not understanding what a relational database is.
C-level managers are making decisions that effect the entire department under them, and set the direction of the company. It's fine if a CIO doesn't know the nuts & bolts of the technology in use, but they should at least understand the basic concepts. That's why things like CIO Magazine and CompTIA's i-Net+ certification exist. They boil down technologies to the essential things someone in that position needs to know.
They've honed their management & decision-making skills over the years. But they should have some clue about what it is they're managing, or else they're just a highly-paid suit in a fancy office.
Many CIOs today cut their teeth on the systems of yesterday, and have spent many years in middle and upper management since their days "in the trenches". They've gotten good at management, but they've lost touch with the day to day realities of what they're managing.
For example, a CIO I worked under advised us that we could increase the efficiency of our database-driven app by reading the records in a random-access manner, rather than processing the whole "file" of orders sequentially each time we wanted to retrieve a record.
Well, as a possible counter-argument, there was the MSX standard back in the 80s. But even then, different MSX manufacturers added their own twists to the machines in order to make them stand out. So, a game might have run on your low-end MSX2, but it wouldn't have had digital speech or 16-color sprites because it's not a Ronco SuperMSX2Deluxe.
That's what the ESRB was...a compromise. Ok, say we compromise on this current issue. What happens when another politician gets a bee in their bonnet? Do we compromise again? If we keep that up, we'll end up in the same spot as if we gave in at the start, but we'll be able to pat ourselves on the back for being so willing to make compromises along the way. We'll probably come out of it feeling like victors.
Not this one.
Thank you! I got this far down into the discussion and I refused to believe I was the only person who remembered that.
Did you ever see that cheesy Michael Keaton movie "Gung Ho", where he's in charge of the auto plant? There's a scene at the end where the Japanese owners are berating the quality of the cars (some of which were literally falling apart, missing windshields, etc.) and Keaton says he would rather have one of those cars than a better car from the Japanese plant. Why? Because it was built by his friends and co-workers, who he got to see pouring their blood, sweat, and tears into those cars.
I read the same kind of sentiment into Allchin's quote. He works for Microsoft, and probably thinks it would be a slap in the face to his co-workers were he to strut around with a MacBook. At least, that's probably what I'd be feeling if I were in his shoes.
Let's try phrasing it this way:
People with knowledge are creating a resource by which any individual who seeks knowledge may find it, and people are donating the fruits of their labors (money) to the WikiMedia Foundation because they value the dissemination of knowledge to those who value and crave it.
Wow...sounds wordy enough to be from the pages of Atlas Shrugged.
I don't think there are people making sacrifices in their own lives to write Wikipedia entries, nor are there people holding guns to the other group making them write Wikipedia entries.
Rand would have loved Wikipedia, IMHO. It's the embodiment of *selfishness*, as she saw the meaning of the word:
I think we have the makings of the next "Brazil" here!
Even if you have a government-issued ID with your picture saying you were maxume, she still wouldn't trust it because she trusts her own senses to identify maxume more than she trusts someone else.
In your identity theft trial, the government (now the relying party) would likely ask her (now the vouching party) whether or not you are her spouse.
Rand was not opposed to someone giving food to a hungry person or a blanket to a freezing person. In fact, she didn't have any objection to charity (as she made clear in one of her Donahue interviews). She objected to the elevation of sacrifice as a virtue, the idea that you should give up your only blanket or food for another, and forced wealth redistribution which she considered to be slavery and which takes away the moral purity of the act of voluntary giving.
Cite: Rand, Ayn. The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism. New York: Penguin Putnam, Inc. 1964.
I doubt the scammers would be honest enough to open these accounts using their own identities.
Then the government would try to confiscate their memories...
Nope. Under most states' laws, both 16 year olds are guilty of statutory rape.
I seem to remember that being mentioned on one of the TNG-era "behind the scenes" specials. They showed a big diagram of the ole' 1701-D and pointed out that there was only one bathroom, and it was just off the bridge, near Capt. Picard's ready room.
The Memory Alpha site back this up with an unsourced quote: "Presumably the adjacent corridor led to a bathroom, however it was never shown on camera and a set was never constructed."
Looking at Memory Alpha a bit further, it appears that every crew quarters had a bathroom as well. But, we never got to see it. It was always "behind that door over there".
I remember reading that Lucas was inspired by Flash Gordon and the like, those campy movie serials. The good guys wear white, the bad guys wear black, the rogue wears both...and I'm not sure how the stormtroopers or Chewbacca fit into this. There's action, suspense, romance, intrigue, and then the good guys win.
The 2004 "release" was a "developer preview", originally meant to get AmigaOS 4.0 hardware and software in the hands of the few remaining Amiga developers so they could start pumping out apps while the OS matured. The original AmigaOne boards were also meant as developer boards, with the intent of selling the platform as a mobile/PDA platform once everything was completed. This new release is the "end user" release, meaning anything added to it after this point is a bug fix or "icing on the cake".
Gary is a GAte aRraY in the ECS chipset, used for I/O & glue logic.
The main obstacle to getting AmigaOS ported to anything other than the AmigaOne is Amiga, Inc's licensing program. They license out the right for a board to carry the Amiga name and run AmigaOS, by virtue of a ROM "dongle" that gets integrated into the motherboard. This means that anything running AmigaOS has to be specifically designed to run AmigaOS. According to messages on the AmigaWorld.net and Amiga.org forums, the company hasn't been very good at getting back to the few people who have emailed them asking about licenses. I can't see value they see in holding such tight reigns on something with such a small market.
Then, there's the matter of developer documentation. The folks at Hyperion who are coding the OS want solid documentation for the hardware they're targeting. They don't want to just look at the Linux Mac code and just trust it works the way it should.
But that second point is largely irrelevant, as they'll never get the chance to do it given the current situation with Amiga, Inc.
Generally, these scams are done against "over the counter" or pink sheet stocks, which are not traded as part of any exchange.
Rogue OpenID providers are dealt with by configuring your OpenID consumer not to trust that server anymore.
See "what about spam?" on the OpenID project's About OpenID page.