Which goes to show you absolutely nothing. Its management that is in control, and I guarantee that management is what chooses what goes on air and what gets released. Just like I can't talk about what an idiot Bush is because I'm in the Air Force, people in the large media corporations can't either.
So, your argument of the personal views of the people at the very bottom of the organization aren't really valid. And sure, most of us wish these folks would grow some balls and form a new corporation that doesn't spew republican talking poitns at will (just watch some john stewart and you can get a mashup of republicans going on every major network and saying the exact same thing (with no variation even in phrasing!) at the same time.
Don't be more blind than you absolutely have to.
Oh yeah, one more thing. Liberal media in an of itself is a neo-con talking point. So, I hope you're enjoying your Kool-aid.
Actually, I an fault the companies for trying to squeeze every penny out of me. Thats like saying "You can't fault the mobsters for beating the shit out of people who didn't pay up their extortion money". Jeez.
*Especially* when we're talking about something that has the potential of $500 billion a year to the economy. And not through the profits of the telcos. The internet is really a public utility that enables business, just like roads and electricity. Making it cheap and plentiful enables huge gains in other economic areas both short term (google) and long term (education benefits booming).
Finally, other countries pay less for more because they had a national plan, subsidized (and regulated) by the government and tax payers, and implemented aggresively. Plain and simple. We simply regulated that the telcos raised their prices without regulating that they provided any extra services with it. The result has been that as telcos have raised prices to pay for fiber and broadband, they have slashed fiber deployments and employee numbers. Meaning the top 1% of the company is making out like bandits, and the nation, the customers, and the employees get screwed. And its cost consumers over $200 billion in direct fees.
After a while, once the word gets out and customers start to leave for alterative "single tier Internet" providers,
The assumption here is that there will *be* other providers. I think that the government should take control of all fiber lines, and rent them out at a set price per strand per mile, with a cap on how much of a given backbone that one company can own. Like 25%. Maybe 50.
The reason I think that is because right now there are basically 2 remaining Tier 1 ISPs...and that number is likely to drop the way that Verizon/AT&T are pushing hard. They don't want competition. It is a lack of competition that allows them to even contemplate this, because they know that if there was true competition they could never ever consider this sort of thing.
I agree that the internet shouldn't be regulated, but we have to make sure that something as important to the national economy and structure as the internet has competition. Have you ever seen that stats on how badly access in this country is lagging behind other countries? Its because we've systematically removed competition from fiber lines in the name of providing more competition. The rational from the telcos: we need to be a monopoly in order to compete. I hope most of you notice the irony in that one.
The liberal media myth is tired, old, and ridiculous. There are 5 corporations that own the media, and those corporations and their CEOs contribute waaay more money to republicans than they do to democrats. Combine this with Republicans=Neocons and Democrats=Moderates, with no real left, and NO ONE in the media is actually liberal. If you want to read or watch something that is actually liberal, you need to look at common dreams or alter news. Those are liberal news sources...which in no way means they aren't accurate. So do a bit or research, and please, stop repeating talking points that are patently false and easily debunked.
Oh, dear god, the cato institute. Run away! Run away!
In all seriousness, though, you're wrong. I'd explain, but I don't do it as well as teletruth does.
As for "the market will solve everything"...no it won't. A true Free Market, one that guarantees competition within a set of reasonable, well-defined rules, is good. An Anarchy Market, where the company who is the "strongest" makes the rules to fit them benefits no one except the top echelons of that one company. The cato instittue likes Anarchy Markets...but the market isn't free if it is owned by a single entity who doesn't want competitors.
Doncha know, that just good business! No matter who you screw, if you make money, its good business! If you're dishonest, but you make money, thats good business! If you lie to your customers and the world, and they're too stupid to figure it out, way to go! Good business.
You may now accept your MBA, fully accredited. You have learned all that you need.
I also almost forgot. Corporate buyers usually end up paying twice...once when they buy the computer, and then again for their "enterprise" liscense, because managing every individual lisence that comes with those computers is too much hassle.
Even though it never gets discussed, their bundling isn't really what makes them anti competitive. Its an annoyance, but one that is easily overcome. (How many clicks does it take to install software? 3?)
The real problem is the windows tax. Windows is automatically loaded on every computer that you buy, even if you get linux put on it. And you pay for it, even if your computer ships with linux, unless you're lucky enough to buy a computer from a OEM that doesn't even sell windows at all. If they sell windows, you pay for windows. That is how windows won, and that is why they're anti-competitve to this day. I mean, wrong is it that even if you buy anohter OS, you still pay for windows?
What makes you think these devices are complicated?
Further, I don't know if you've noticed, but many times when you are poor, unemployed, (or a kid, which is what they're really aimed at), etc, then you've got a lot of free time.
Free time which you can then use educate yourself so you can find a job/sustain yourself.
The idea behind these computer is that they're supposed to be extremely resiliant.
And heres another thing about people that are poor. Believe it or not, they're used to finding ways to make shit work. So yes, if you give them some manuals on the computer, they will be able to call their village techy.
First, Bill Gates is *never* honest in his opinion. The man is a business man to the core of his soul. There is nothing he does that isn't aimed and bringing an advantage and a profit. Nothing. I doubt he kisses his wife without measuring the cost.
Second. One laptop per child. What use is two? Honestly, don't be ridiculous.
Third, take the example of peru. Peru chose to make sure that they used open source because they wanted to have *local* companies receiving the profit of their computing and networking investments, not american companies.
By giving them computers with open source software, you give them the hope to be able to build their countries themselves. Their own computers and networks, their own software, their own bridges and buildings. You give them all of that. And they'll be building a local economy, instead of having some vast international corporation doing it for them and taking all the knowledge and profit back to some other country.
Consider that everything you have been told is wrong.
These are not delinquent children that simply aren't applying themselves. These are millions of people who are diseased, starving, and desperate.
Now, if we absolutely left them alone, some people might eventually be able to stand on their own two feet. But that would be after hundreds of years, and plenty of famine, war, and the general riding of the four horsemen of the apocalypse across africa.
I'm sure that since you are worried about "actively destroying hope", then you obviously are going to start fighting against taking any african resources our of africa. Since that happens to be a major portion of *why* they're so poor. All the natural resources of africa went to benefit {drumroll please} Europe and the United States! Big surprise. And we're still doing it. Oil drilling operations that pull in hundreds of millions of dollars a year sit right next to people with lifespans of 30 to 40 years, if they're lucky. You konw what "doing it for themselves" would be? Rising up and kicking out sorry asses out of the country.
The mindset of "anyone can create their own opportunities, no matter what" is utterly assinine, and really shows a very narrow, very america-centric world-view. I challenge you to spend 1 year in somalia, or rwanda, or hell, even one of the best off countries like ghana, without taking anything with you. Good luck.
Education is the biggest problem...they need as much knowledge available as possible. And these laptops can help with that. They can help alot. These laptops are about giving people the tools they need to learn - not just to fish, but to fish, farm, hunt, gather, build, heal, and *live*.
Actually, there are more streaming sites among the non-blocked websites than the blocked ones. Try again.
As for the non-censored Internet Cafe, I'm sure you're right. I'm sure nothing is blocked there. Uh-huh.
That said, the NIPRNET does need to have bandwidth limited. But rather than blocking specific sites, how about you block that variety of file from being opened on those computers, hmmm?
In fact, if you're worried about it, how about you disable windows media player? And lock down the desktops so people can't install other media players?
Nice try, dude.
I'm in the Air Force, and I know we have a bias against the left. The marines are way crazier than we are, so I'm sure they're experiencing a fair bit of bias too.
Or, I could just, you know, decide for myself what is right, based on my experiences and readings, and believe in reality, rather than thousands of year old mythologies because hank told me to.
I've been considering trying to start a non-profit or for profit company to bring OSS to education...do you suppose you could drop by my website (www.qkslvrwolf.com) and drop me an email or something? I'd like to pick your brain...
Advantages to Open Source: 1) Student productivity. If your school uses proprietary (sp?) software, you either have to force your students to pay for it, or you have to buy enough licenses to support them at home. Thus, this may limit what you can assign your students at home, or set up a class barrior for them; the ones that can afford microsoft office can work at home and do better, then ones who cannot afford it will have to work only at school. There is OSS software out there that can replace proprietary office suites, image production, math formula writing, diagraming, collboration..just about everything I can think of that a school uses. It can do so on any platform. Yes, even windows. Most if not all of these programs have a support option you can purchase. For instance, using Staroffice instead of open office for your support option.
2) Funding. Schools are able to choose when and how they upgrade with OSS, while still maintaining software that is new enough to be worthwhile. For instance, a school could upgrade a computer lab to all brand new machines (lets say 20 machines @ $1000 a piece)...or they can use Linux Terminal Server Client on all their old machines, and pay 3-4k for a server to connect them too. This would mean a leaner, more efficient budget.
3) Educational benefits. Imagine a network of schools that develops content for open source educational programs jointly, shares the work, and everyone benefits, all implemented on an open source software stack. It could revolutionise education, for the positive.
4) Teaching students to use software, instead of a specific application. Teaching someone to use Microsoft Office XP is equivilant to giving them a fish. Teaching them to use office software, and reinforcing the lesson by making them use several different version to accomplish the same task is teaching them to fish. For instance, students could work on projects in KOffice, OpenOffice, abiword/that calc program I'm blanking on/wiki software/etc. If I were an employer, I would want an employee who could quickly and efficiently learn new software and teach those around me, rather than someone who had to be sent to classes just to use what I currently run.
5) Allowing students to experiment: computers are going to be a major part of the workforce and society for ever. By using open source software, students gain the capability to tinker under the hood...just like a shop class does, but for computers.
Capatialism only works when there is competition, and the only way for there to be competition is to mandate competition. Monopolies are not a part of a working capatalistic economy...they're what happens when the system breaks. However, monopolies are what the corporations want because they don't care about anything except shortt term personal gains. The rest of us need to worry about long term social gains.
Do you have a citation for your little statistic there? Because, personally, I think you're bullshit. No offense.
To be fair, all I have is emperical(sp?) evidence. But here in the suburbs of St. Loius, I have one choice for internet: SBC. In Maryland, its comcast. Down where by dad's at, bellsouth. (is that the same as SBC, I'm not sure). Kansas, where I'm originally from? Sun Cable, who has a parent company among the big 2 or 3, but I'm not sure which one it is....
I mean, sure, you can go with dial-up from the local mom and pop, but who's providing *their* connection to the whole wide world? SBC.
Anyway, I agree with the poster above who said that regionally there is little or no choice. I've been quite a few places in the last couple of years, and your choice for braodband service in all of those places was limited to a single company.
Like I said, I only have empirical eveidence, but I definitely get the impression that you don't have any more real evidence than I do.
sweet! its not just me! thank god!
I'm having to reinstall because I can't log in to the bloody box..my keyboard won't work at all!
Does it really work to use the em64? Can I install that from some kind of safe mode?
Slashdot Mirror
In fact, management just makes stuff up and jobs are threatened when they don't toe the party line.
So, your argument of the personal views of the people at the very bottom of the organization aren't really valid. And sure, most of us wish these folks would grow some balls and form a new corporation that doesn't spew republican talking poitns at will (just watch some john stewart and you can get a mashup of republicans going on every major network and saying the exact same thing (with no variation even in phrasing!) at the same time.
Don't be more blind than you absolutely have to.
Oh yeah, one more thing. Liberal media in an of itself is a neo-con talking point. So, I hope you're enjoying your Kool-aid.
Which means...they're trying to screw both sides from the middle!
*Especially* when we're talking about something that has the potential of $500 billion a year to the economy. And not through the profits of the telcos. The internet is really a public utility that enables business, just like roads and electricity. Making it cheap and plentiful enables huge gains in other economic areas both short term (google) and long term (education benefits booming).
Finally, other countries pay less for more because they had a national plan, subsidized (and regulated) by the government and tax payers, and implemented aggresively. Plain and simple. We simply regulated that the telcos raised their prices without regulating that they provided any extra services with it. The result has been that as telcos have raised prices to pay for fiber and broadband, they have slashed fiber deployments and employee numbers. Meaning the top 1% of the company is making out like bandits, and the nation, the customers, and the employees get screwed. And its cost consumers over $200 billion in direct fees.
The assumption here is that there will *be* other providers. I think that the government should take control of all fiber lines, and rent them out at a set price per strand per mile, with a cap on how much of a given backbone that one company can own. Like 25%. Maybe 50.
The reason I think that is because right now there are basically 2 remaining Tier 1 ISPs...and that number is likely to drop the way that Verizon/AT&T are pushing hard. They don't want competition. It is a lack of competition that allows them to even contemplate this, because they know that if there was true competition they could never ever consider this sort of thing.
I agree that the internet shouldn't be regulated, but we have to make sure that something as important to the national economy and structure as the internet has competition. Have you ever seen that stats on how badly access in this country is lagging behind other countries? Its because we've systematically removed competition from fiber lines in the name of providing more competition. The rational from the telcos: we need to be a monopoly in order to compete. I hope most of you notice the irony in that one.
Teletruth.org, my friends. Its well worth the read.
The liberal media myth is tired, old, and ridiculous. There are 5 corporations that own the media, and those corporations and their CEOs contribute waaay more money to republicans than they do to democrats. Combine this with Republicans=Neocons and Democrats=Moderates, with no real left, and NO ONE in the media is actually liberal. If you want to read or watch something that is actually liberal, you need to look at common dreams or alter news. Those are liberal news sources...which in no way means they aren't accurate. So do a bit or research, and please, stop repeating talking points that are patently false and easily debunked.
In all seriousness, though, you're wrong. I'd explain, but I don't do it as well as teletruth does.
As for "the market will solve everything"...no it won't. A true Free Market, one that guarantees competition within a set of reasonable, well-defined rules, is good. An Anarchy Market, where the company who is the "strongest" makes the rules to fit them benefits no one except the top echelons of that one company. The cato instittue likes Anarchy Markets...but the market isn't free if it is owned by a single entity who doesn't want competitors.
Doncha know, that just good business! No matter who you screw, if you make money, its good business! If you're dishonest, but you make money, thats good business! If you lie to your customers and the world, and they're too stupid to figure it out, way to go! Good business. You may now accept your MBA, fully accredited. You have learned all that you need.
I also almost forgot. Corporate buyers usually end up paying twice...once when they buy the computer, and then again for their "enterprise" liscense, because managing every individual lisence that comes with those computers is too much hassle.
Even though it never gets discussed, their bundling isn't really what makes them anti competitive. Its an annoyance, but one that is easily overcome. (How many clicks does it take to install software? 3?) The real problem is the windows tax. Windows is automatically loaded on every computer that you buy, even if you get linux put on it. And you pay for it, even if your computer ships with linux, unless you're lucky enough to buy a computer from a OEM that doesn't even sell windows at all. If they sell windows, you pay for windows. That is how windows won, and that is why they're anti-competitve to this day. I mean, wrong is it that even if you buy anohter OS, you still pay for windows?
And now OpenOffice Base does everything access does, but does it better because it has much more seemless connections to full databases.
What makes you think these devices are complicated? Further, I don't know if you've noticed, but many times when you are poor, unemployed, (or a kid, which is what they're really aimed at), etc, then you've got a lot of free time. Free time which you can then use educate yourself so you can find a job/sustain yourself. The idea behind these computer is that they're supposed to be extremely resiliant. And heres another thing about people that are poor. Believe it or not, they're used to finding ways to make shit work. So yes, if you give them some manuals on the computer, they will be able to call their village techy.
Second. One laptop per child. What use is two? Honestly, don't be ridiculous.
Third, take the example of peru. Peru chose to make sure that they used open source because they wanted to have *local* companies receiving the profit of their computing and networking investments, not american companies.
By giving them computers with open source software, you give them the hope to be able to build their countries themselves. Their own computers and networks, their own software, their own bridges and buildings. You give them all of that. And they'll be building a local economy, instead of having some vast international corporation doing it for them and taking all the knowledge and profit back to some other country.
Consider that everything you have been told is wrong.
These are not delinquent children that simply aren't applying themselves. These are millions of people who are diseased, starving, and desperate.
Now, if we absolutely left them alone, some people might eventually be able to stand on their own two feet. But that would be after hundreds of years, and plenty of famine, war, and the general riding of the four horsemen of the apocalypse across africa.
I'm sure that since you are worried about "actively destroying hope", then you obviously are going to start fighting against taking any african resources our of africa. Since that happens to be a major portion of *why* they're so poor. All the natural resources of africa went to benefit {drumroll please} Europe and the United States! Big surprise. And we're still doing it. Oil drilling operations that pull in hundreds of millions of dollars a year sit right next to people with lifespans of 30 to 40 years, if they're lucky. You konw what "doing it for themselves" would be? Rising up and kicking out sorry asses out of the country.
The mindset of "anyone can create their own opportunities, no matter what" is utterly assinine, and really shows a very narrow, very america-centric world-view. I challenge you to spend 1 year in somalia, or rwanda, or hell, even one of the best off countries like ghana, without taking anything with you. Good luck.
Education is the biggest problem...they need as much knowledge available as possible. And these laptops can help with that. They can help alot. These laptops are about giving people the tools they need to learn - not just to fish, but to fish, farm, hunt, gather, build, heal, and *live*.
The democrats are moderates.
The Repubs are neo-conservative right-wing nut jobs.
There is *nothing* representing the left.
And furthermore, to the guy who replied there were "plenty of candidates, go check out what the big 2 do to the debates
yeah, this doesn't hold water as all but one of those right wing sites streams audio if not video, and I know wonkette doesn't have any multimedia.
Actually, there are more streaming sites among the non-blocked websites than the blocked ones. Try again. As for the non-censored Internet Cafe, I'm sure you're right. I'm sure nothing is blocked there. Uh-huh. That said, the NIPRNET does need to have bandwidth limited. But rather than blocking specific sites, how about you block that variety of file from being opened on those computers, hmmm? In fact, if you're worried about it, how about you disable windows media player? And lock down the desktops so people can't install other media players? Nice try, dude. I'm in the Air Force, and I know we have a bias against the left. The marines are way crazier than we are, so I'm sure they're experiencing a fair bit of bias too.
What does that leave, exactly?
Or, I could just, you know, decide for myself what is right, based on my experiences and readings, and believe in reality, rather than thousands of year old mythologies because hank told me to.
Oh, it really sounds ridiculous. Trust me.
Although, congrats for actually considering your faith. Most people don't manage that.
I've been considering trying to start a non-profit or for profit company to bring OSS to education...do you suppose you could drop by my website (www.qkslvrwolf.com) and drop me an email or something? I'd like to pick your brain...
Advantages to Open Source: 1) Student productivity. If your school uses proprietary (sp?) software, you either have to force your students to pay for it, or you have to buy enough licenses to support them at home. Thus, this may limit what you can assign your students at home, or set up a class barrior for them; the ones that can afford microsoft office can work at home and do better, then ones who cannot afford it will have to work only at school. There is OSS software out there that can replace proprietary office suites, image production, math formula writing, diagraming, collboration..just about everything I can think of that a school uses. It can do so on any platform. Yes, even windows. Most if not all of these programs have a support option you can purchase. For instance, using Staroffice instead of open office for your support option.
2) Funding. Schools are able to choose when and how they upgrade with OSS, while still maintaining software that is new enough to be worthwhile. For instance, a school could upgrade a computer lab to all brand new machines (lets say 20 machines @ $1000 a piece)...or they can use Linux Terminal Server Client on all their old machines, and pay 3-4k for a server to connect them too. This would mean a leaner, more efficient budget.
3) Educational benefits. Imagine a network of schools that develops content for open source educational programs jointly, shares the work, and everyone benefits, all implemented on an open source software stack. It could revolutionise education, for the positive.
4) Teaching students to use software, instead of a specific application. Teaching someone to use Microsoft Office XP is equivilant to giving them a fish. Teaching them to use office software, and reinforcing the lesson by making them use several different version to accomplish the same task is teaching them to fish. For instance, students could work on projects in KOffice, OpenOffice, abiword/that calc program I'm blanking on/wiki software/etc. If I were an employer, I would want an employee who could quickly and efficiently learn new software and teach those around me, rather than someone who had to be sent to classes just to use what I currently run.
5) Allowing students to experiment: computers are going to be a major part of the workforce and society for ever. By using open source software, students gain the capability to tinker under the hood...just like a shop class does, but for computers.
Capatialism only works when there is competition, and the only way for there to be competition is to mandate competition. Monopolies are not a part of a working capatalistic economy...they're what happens when the system breaks. However, monopolies are what the corporations want because they don't care about anything except shortt term personal gains. The rest of us need to worry about long term social gains.
I believe you mean his new Rolls Royce or Ferrarri? A BMW is for lowly middle management these days...if that.
Do you have a citation for your little statistic there? Because, personally, I think you're bullshit. No offense.
To be fair, all I have is emperical(sp?) evidence. But here in the suburbs of St. Loius, I have one choice for internet: SBC. In Maryland, its comcast. Down where by dad's at, bellsouth. (is that the same as SBC, I'm not sure). Kansas, where I'm originally from? Sun Cable, who has a parent company among the big 2 or 3, but I'm not sure which one it is....
I mean, sure, you can go with dial-up from the local mom and pop, but who's providing *their* connection to the whole wide world? SBC.
Anyway, I agree with the poster above who said that regionally there is little or no choice. I've been quite a few places in the last couple of years, and your choice for braodband service in all of those places was limited to a single company.
Like I said, I only have empirical eveidence, but I definitely get the impression that you don't have any more real evidence than I do.
Oh, come on, mods, this is funny.
sweet! its not just me! thank god! I'm having to reinstall because I can't log in to the bloody box..my keyboard won't work at all! Does it really work to use the em64? Can I install that from some kind of safe mode?