Remote administration is not the same as a true virtual desktop. Try to imagine yourself in his situation before offering a solution - would you want to do all your work all the time over VNC? I wouldn't. I wouldn't mind it so much over TS or X.
Amazing, how self-serving the ideology of many is. Would you be willing to pay four, five, even six times or more the amount of money you now pay for food, clothes, and electronic hardware to "protect American jobs" by keeping low-cost labor out of the farms and clothes factories, or by putting tarriffs on imported goods? Are your sneakers made in the US by people making a reasonable living wage? Yet when some other worker is willing to work at $40,000 a year instead of the $100,000 that you expect (thus making the goods produced thereby that much more affordable for all the rest of us), suddenly up come the walls.
Actually, what I think is sadder is that you, living in a country with virtually the highest standard of living in the world, can still feel like you're in a state of crisis, and that someone from one of the poorest countries in the world should cut *you* slack for it. I don't flame very often, but you're pathetic as well as ungrateful.
Briefly, the environmental movement seeks to take away your freedoms when those freedoms are overtly destructive to the well-being of others. They are trying to include the quality of the environment in that set of public goods upon which personal well-being and freedom is founded. That is how the are distinct from organizations like the NRA, the ACLU, or NORML.
Your freedoms do not exist in a vacuum, and there are many very worthwhile causes that are not explicitly about freedom.
I'm sure that in most cases if a business case can be made for it, it will pass. Some people do web research, some people relax by doing a little web browsing, etc. But there's no doubt that the internet has been the goof-off's best friend - and that a clampdown would result in a net productivity gain.
It's not flashy wizards and pretty icons that matter. It's a file selection widget that filters on extension and works for all the applications. It's a unified printing and font management model. It's little details like this - unsexy, and invisible to those of us who have become accustomed to the workarounds - that really make a difference.
I like and respect digital and electronic music, but while there are many similarities between programming and music, there are some big differences that ensure that (acoustic) musicians are really a different breed.
There have actually been documented differences in the brain structure of great professional musicians that seems to indicate that they process acoustic information with more and different parts of the brain than normal people do. This can even mean a possible mild deficit in other types of function. In any case, much of the musical sensibility seems to rely on nonconscious cognitive activity, while the sense of structure in programming is always very explicit, and mostly conscious. Also, programming may have a certain sense of rhythm to it in some cases, but musical performance in real time emerges from internal rhythm in a unique way.
I see programming as resembling composition more than musical performance, in any case.
Exactly my thought. I doubt the reviewer has seen more than 20 films in his whole life. When he can talk about the Spartacus references in Tron, I'll be more impressed.
And the other aspects - plot, for example - much lower. 4, maybe. 3, even. It was a *bad* script. *Bad.* The storyline got soggy towards the end, and the dialogue was cringe-worthy.
As a visual piece though, and in terms of art direction, it was ground-breaking, of course.
Semantic point: the English were less guilty of genocide per-se, insofar as their goal was the political domination of France, not the complete supplanting of French culture with English culture and the removal of all things French from the landscape. It was a murderous campaign, but not per-se genocidal. Not all wanton acts of brutality are genocide - indeed, most are not.
I agree with your principles, but ultimately they're doomed. Because it is very very unlikely that a critical mass of people will get on this bandwagon. Especially geeks - geeks are such anti-joiners, that as soon as they hear that 2 people had done something, they will immediately go to work to explain why they won't be the third.
The real solution is to get one's political hands dirty, to do civil disobedience (and be willing to go the course) or to participate in lobbying efforts. Not buying DVD's isn't going to do much.
I'll answer all the 'soft money as speech' cases this way: there are already much more odious limits on speech placed by those interests who can afford billboards. The DCMA, for one, and the SSCA looks to be another. I'd rather be allowed to put nude bodies on a billboard and be prevented from promoting a candidate than vice versa. I'd rather be able to have fair use of copyrighted works, I'd rather not see culture put under lock and key, and I'd rather not see the Skylarovs of the world jailed.
As far as I'm concerned, the system is so broken, that limiting the billboard-buying rights of a few isn't going to keep me up at nights.
Because money isn't speech. If you can't tell the difference between saying something and handing out cash, then you've got real problems.
The idea that giving money is a form of speech is the most ridiculous defense of the current corrupt system I can think of. After all, you are allowed to try to talk your way out of a speeding ticket - as soon as you've pulled out the wallet, you've gone into a completely different domain, which we call bribery.
Something that constantly gets missed is this: both China and Russia *never had democratic traditions to begin with* (modulo Kerensky's very very short-lived provisional government.) The current regime in China is *as free a government as they have ever had,* and has more democratic mechanisms than any they have ever had.
Further, the most purely capitalistic eras of American history did *not* coincide with the freest in terms of civil rights or liberties.
Why is this modded as insightful? If he works for Morpheus, why is the parent poster mocking them for complaining about getting cut off of a network they didn't pay to play on?
If they get a "false positive," they can compare the original paper with the one that came up as the source material. It should be obvious at the point if there's plaigarism, at least no less obvious than it would be before this service existed. If the department involved doesn't have a process in place to verify plaigarism by looking at the source text, that's a problem, but that's a problem with the department's policies, not the service.
I see absolutely no problem with this, and so far no one has cited the dreaded property clause, either. This looks like a fine service.
Slashdot Mirror
Remote administration is not the same as a true virtual desktop. Try to imagine yourself in his situation before offering a solution - would you want to do all your work all the time over VNC? I wouldn't. I wouldn't mind it so much over TS or X.
Actually, what I think is sadder is that you, living in a country with virtually the highest standard of living in the world, can still feel like you're in a state of crisis, and that someone from one of the poorest countries in the world should cut *you* slack for it. I don't flame very often, but you're pathetic as well as ungrateful.
Interestingly enough, I was told by a lead in the IE team that no one in Microsoft ever used MFC. That was strictly for export only.
Does the Church of Latter Day Saints have any problems in Germany? In many ways, it's the most American of all religions.
What sucks is when I share all my Revelations, but as soon as I try to download someone else's Doctrine, they log off.
Does that dictum apply to your love life?
Yes, no true Scientologist would have done these things.
Insert obligatory If This Were Microsoft Instead Of Lotus remark here.
Maybe I'll see it after all, then.
Your freedoms do not exist in a vacuum, and there are many very worthwhile causes that are not explicitly about freedom.
I'm sure that in most cases if a business case can be made for it, it will pass. Some people do web research, some people relax by doing a little web browsing, etc. But there's no doubt that the internet has been the goof-off's best friend - and that a clampdown would result in a net productivity gain.
It's not flashy wizards and pretty icons that matter. It's a file selection widget that filters on extension and works for all the applications. It's a unified printing and font management model. It's little details like this - unsexy, and invisible to those of us who have become accustomed to the workarounds - that really make a difference.
There have actually been documented differences in the brain structure of great professional musicians that seems to indicate that they process acoustic information with more and different parts of the brain than normal people do. This can even mean a possible mild deficit in other types of function. In any case, much of the musical sensibility seems to rely on nonconscious cognitive activity, while the sense of structure in programming is always very explicit, and mostly conscious. Also, programming may have a certain sense of rhythm to it in some cases, but musical performance in real time emerges from internal rhythm in a unique way.
I see programming as resembling composition more than musical performance, in any case.
Exactly my thought. I doubt the reviewer has seen more than 20 films in his whole life. When he can talk about the Spartacus references in Tron, I'll be more impressed.
And the other aspects - plot, for example - much lower. 4, maybe. 3, even. It was a *bad* script. *Bad.* The storyline got soggy towards the end, and the dialogue was cringe-worthy.
As a visual piece though, and in terms of art direction, it was ground-breaking, of course.
Semantic point: the English were less guilty of genocide per-se, insofar as their goal was the political domination of France, not the complete supplanting of French culture with English culture and the removal of all things French from the landscape. It was a murderous campaign, but not per-se genocidal. Not all wanton acts of brutality are genocide - indeed, most are not.
I've heard beige described as the goth color of mourning.
The real solution is to get one's political hands dirty, to do civil disobedience (and be willing to go the course) or to participate in lobbying efforts. Not buying DVD's isn't going to do much.
I'm trying to do something about the "they."
I'll answer all the 'soft money as speech' cases this way: there are already much more odious limits on speech placed by those interests who can afford billboards. The DCMA, for one, and the SSCA looks to be another. I'd rather be allowed to put nude bodies on a billboard and be prevented from promoting a candidate than vice versa. I'd rather be able to have fair use of copyrighted works, I'd rather not see culture put under lock and key, and I'd rather not see the Skylarovs of the world jailed.
As far as I'm concerned, the system is so broken, that limiting the billboard-buying rights of a few isn't going to keep me up at nights.
Because money isn't speech. If you can't tell the difference between saying something and handing out cash, then you've got real problems.
The idea that giving money is a form of speech is the most ridiculous defense of the current corrupt system I can think of. After all, you are allowed to try to talk your way out of a speeding ticket - as soon as you've pulled out the wallet, you've gone into a completely different domain, which we call bribery.
Further, the most purely capitalistic eras of American history did *not* coincide with the freest in terms of civil rights or liberties.
People are only customers if they are revenue units.
Why is this modded as insightful? If he works for Morpheus, why is the parent poster mocking them for complaining about getting cut off of a network they didn't pay to play on?
I'll take that bet. Where's my hundred bucks?
If they get a "false positive," they can compare the original paper with the one that came up as the source material. It should be obvious at the point if there's plaigarism, at least no less obvious than it would be before this service existed. If the department involved doesn't have a process in place to verify plaigarism by looking at the source text, that's a problem, but that's a problem with the department's policies, not the service.
I see absolutely no problem with this, and so far no one has cited the dreaded property clause, either. This looks like a fine service.