When you think you're doing something for somebody's own good without consulting them, you can essentially be seen as doing it in their name and/or infantilizing them. Not only did this potentially cause danger to many of China's citizens, as your motto says, but they likely didn't appreciate it in form at all. You don't see reports of similar incidents on the mainland done by nationals. Just totally counterproductive and it embarrassed me.
Anonymous look the imperialist assholes with this totally counterproductive stunt. They need to see how offensive they have been in their misguided "quest." to "free" the Chinese people. I'm so embarrassed this has been done.
Observing this interplay between the two separate groups is the only way to reliably oversee and glean reliable data that either or both are not compromised, or "rooted."
It's a brilliant solution. Be glad they implemented it.
The next obvious question is, how do they have the oversight mechanisms kept secret and in redundancy?
They'd have to be pretty much 100% passive.
I remember the Casimir effect was measured using two closely spaced plates, but I thought it was an only-repulsive force, not attractive. Oops, I guess I didn't input that data correctly. Gosh I wish I had known that before. As always, just a reflection away.
But of course this is the natural way to build machines. Use the infinitely-renewable natural birth-force of the universe to keep things that do exist and are dynamically in opposition from crashing into one another. The birth-force of the universe emanates from nothing, but not from something. If there is no local space for the birth-force virtual particles to actualize into something, it shall extinguish and reincorporate as the force to either attract or repel any two objects considered in relation to one another. Is this not the perfection of "Good Fences Make Good Neighbors?" Something like "The Holy Spirit?"
I can't imagine this doesn't take place in thought, as well, and therefore in our personalities, and therefore in society.
"A population that lacks the will to assert its rights neither deserves nor receives them."
I agree with your take except for the "deserves" part. That is the mindset of a true slave. Despite what we have been cornered into believing, the world we live in, and specifically the world of humankind, is one based on compassion. Through the ages we have tolerated the sociopaths who confuse themselves with society and "God," not out of cowardice, but out of compassion for them and our fellow man. It's only been the technology of the last few thousand years that has enabled these people to extend the reach of their malformed psyches to extend so far as to actually degrade our ability to support their fantasy world. We just can't handle the metastasis that they are any more and we have to remove these children from the fake pedestals on which they sit so that we can survive as a species.
Our mass media and Hollywood is swamped with slave-thought. The images we see of men, women, families, society, are all those of what a slave sees, but is in actuality the antithesis of what they are trying to portray.
We don't need to continue propagating their misinterpretations. It's time to come together and help them make a choice to either heal and move forward, or be shunned.
Just to clarify, by "slave" I do not mean those forced into labor, I mean those who think like a slave. This specifically excludes African-American history, because theirs is a history of resistance and hope in the face of covetous hateful tyranny. A true slave is one who forsakes hope, faith, truth, and therefore compassion, because compassion is the one thing that defines us as a group.
I wouldn't say that text messaging is dumbing down kids, rather we simply have a better recording of just how stupid most kids let themselves be.
People in our demographic are much more academically educated and familiar with technology, so we are surprised by all their drivel. That's kind of why we're dorks, you know. It's nothing new, we just see it as different because they have to encode it into shitty phone keypads they have no control over, or interest in.
Seriously, don't you remember being far more interested in some new gadget an adult brought out, compared to any other kid around? That gives us a lot of motivation to meet the tech in the middle, by using whatever awfully designed interface just as completely as possible. That was (and is) a point of pride with me, anyway.
Am I the only one to be mightily impressed at the idea of implementing Expose in javascript??
I haven't looked yet at how well they accomplished this, but damn, I love the idea of having a common Expose-like function available to me on all the modern OS's I am forced to use daily.
Kent wouldn't exist as a real American hero, if it wasn't for the villian, Venter, and his company Celera.
If not for Kent, the human genome would be patented right now by Celera, which would be one of the highest valued companies in the world due to the royalties that you and I would be paying right now and for the next fifteen years.
Make no mistake, this company is a real-life villian, and giving them this patent only means more economic hardship for you and I, even though I acknowledge that under current law they should be given the patent.
Erroneous "insights" such as these are pretty common in any context you can think of where hysteresis is inherent, and the observer is inside the hysteresis loop.
Circular thought process: 1) Gosh, it takes so much extra stuff to make my insecure system secure! 2) Why don't we just make the system secure in the first place, thereby eliminating the need? 3) Gosh, my newly secure system is really hard to use, practically useless! 4) Why don't I go back to the more usable system, since my recent experience has been so secure? 5) Gosh, my box has been owned! 6) Why don't I buy the newest extra security stuff to make my usable system more secure? 7) GOTO (1)
You could switch that with (to name a couple): hot-cold/overdressed-underdressed flush-tapped/skinflint-spendthrift
Our country is going through a particularly painful part of the freedom-tyranny/insecure-secure hysteresis loop right now.
These aren't concepts for which there is a solution, because separating oneself from the axes on which they lie is impossible and/or undesirable; you can't eliminate basic properties of a system without consequences.
Both the RIAA and the MPAA manage to insert sufficient language into some unrelated bill (ala what they tried with the Patriot Act) that authorizes preemptive strikes against p2p networks, saying that they could serve as massive distributed attack vectors against our nation's cyber-infrastructure.
Flip forward a few weeks. I wake up on a typical Sunday like today and start up Azureus. Within a couple of minutes, a tomahawk cruise missile is launched from a regional military installation.
The upside of my imminent demise is my last minutes will be spent mellowly and obliviously perusing mininova, seeing if anyone uploaded a torrent for that one episode of The Daily Show I missed last Thursday.
If only I had stayed up past 10PM that night, I would never have brought this on myself.
Yeah I knew they were around, and I should have stated that, my implication by saying that they "weren't in the picture" was that they weren't in direct competition at that point, which I remembered as starting around the 486 days. Someone else just commented that this was a mistaken assumption, and I stand corrected.
My question to address this then is, if indeed AMD was a second source for the 8088 way from the beginning, how did the situation evolve such that Intel didn't suffer any competition until relatively recently? Why wasn't AMD doing the same thing back then?
I knew they were around, but I was under the possibly mistaken impression that they were not directly competing until around the 486 days. I may be thinking of how it turned out as a situation rather than how it was formally constructed. Thanks for letting me know this, I'll check this out.
Intel was a monopolist loooong before AMD was in the picture. We're talking 8086 on up.
Monopolists almost by definition do underhanded, unethical, and illegal things like these under-the-counter transactions, because without them the market would never have become theirs in the first place. That's why AMD and Transmeta could never be on a level playing field with Intel, they're just not corrupt enough. The myth that this is just healthy competition between like-minded companies needs to be dispelled over and over until everyone understands just what has gone on and is still going on today.
...gentoo is *the* bleeding edge distro and is proud of that. Almost every CS major at the University of Chicago has it on their Thinkpad or Powerbook.
As for being unstable in regards to updating, I can only guess the submitter didn't configure his system correctly and allowed clearly labeled beta builds of server components into the automated upgrade queue. That's an irresponsible mistake only a newbie would make, and has nothing to do with the distro itself (or any distro for that matter).
I personally am an adherent to something akin to the RMS philosophy. I believe information wants to be free, and that patents and copyrights should be gradually phased back to their original very limited focus and scope.
That said, the facts show that Transmeta decided to play by the rules and compete in the chip business. The facts also show that they received the standard treatment from one of the two biggest technology monopolists of our age, Intel (our friend M$ being the other). Intel has a long history of anti-competitive illegal abuse of their dominant position in the marketplace.
We know this through contracts with distributors and partners that have been periodically leaked and reported on, as well as a mountain of articles detailing their abusive platform tie-ins and deceptive marketing techniques. A look at the current antitrust case brought by AMD alone is damning. Separately, each piece of the puzzle isn't blatantly illegal, but that's the game monopolists (and the mafia) play; it's hard to prove collusion and/or conspiracy.
If Transmeta had never successfully fabbed a chip, or had never found a major distribution partner, you could rightfully call them a troll. The important point is that even if this was the case, Intel still stole their technology and called it their own, and is liable for massive patent violations.
But that's not the case. Transmeta tried, made a pretty damn good go of it, and was squashed. I think the only part of this in dispute is if Transmeta could bring an antitrust case like AMD against Intel as well. I wish they would, because without companies like AMD and Transmeta, today we'd be paying $2000 for a (t)Itanic clocked at 300MHz or so with no backwards (32-bit) compatibility, power saving, or other performance innovations. Instead we get to pay $100-$200 for a multi-GHz chip with all these features.
Now Intel shows us exactly why they are the poster child for patent reform after rummaging through their bin of monopolist patent bombs for a few months and countersuing.
[1] And yes, I have told him to fix it. Even did the neighbourly thing and secured his network for for him. The following day he removed my configuration because "he didn't like entering a password". He'll learn the hard way eventually.
"The neighborly thing" you did was the only blatantly illegal act anyone has mentioned in this thread.
First illegal act: You logged into his AP over HTTP by entering a username and a password, that you guessed because it was probably the default but is still technically "using false credentials to gain access" and also probably "criminal unauthorized access."
Second illegal act: You changed his router configuration without permission which immediately caused your neighbor a DoS on his own network! That's the kind of act these companies claim millions of damage for, when some idiot kid logs into their system and changes some config file. He then had to go THROUGH YOU in order to access his network again. Extortion? Protection?
Ironically, you first did exactly what you wrote that others should go to jail for, namely access his network at all. That's the one thing you did that wasn't definitely illegal.
I think you confuse what you perceive as moral as being lawful and/or ethical, when you haven't thought through your own moral-justification behavior. You're even criticizing others for the same exact behavior. Why?
And what about just plain-old invasion of privacy?
Your words echo an understandable concern in letting the pendulum swing too far the other way. The maximum-entropy result you describe is just as undesirable as the copyright-and-patent-your-fart extreme that exists today.
As I said before, incremental steps in the direction of FOSS could be taken by all that would not jeopardize your livelihood below a perfectly reasonable amount.
Side note: professors write books all the time for free, mostly in the form of contributed chapters.
Slashdot Mirror
When you think you're doing something for somebody's own good without consulting them, you can essentially be seen as doing it in their name and/or infantilizing them. Not only did this potentially cause danger to many of China's citizens, as your motto says, but they likely didn't appreciate it in form at all. You don't see reports of similar incidents on the mainland done by nationals. Just totally counterproductive and it embarrassed me.
Anonymous look the imperialist assholes with this totally counterproductive stunt. They need to see how offensive they have been in their misguided "quest." to "free" the Chinese people. I'm so embarrassed this has been done.
...Valve's Newell Thinks PS3 Needs To Be "Open Like a Man"
Observing this interplay between the two separate groups is the only way to reliably oversee and glean reliable data that either or both are not compromised, or "rooted." It's a brilliant solution. Be glad they implemented it. The next obvious question is, how do they have the oversight mechanisms kept secret and in redundancy? They'd have to be pretty much 100% passive.
A Subtle Knife, for a subtle move?
Say it isn't so! All we need now is the NSA being responsible for draining the Dust out of the world.
Killing more ethically or not, having more efficient killers in the form of robots assures one thing... ...more killing.
And watch, they'll probably be employed to control civilians in the concentration-style camps around the world.
I remember the Casimir effect was measured using two closely spaced plates, but I thought it was an only-repulsive force, not attractive. Oops, I guess I didn't input that data correctly. Gosh I wish I had known that before. As always, just a reflection away.
But of course this is the natural way to build machines. Use the infinitely-renewable natural birth-force of the universe to keep things that do exist and are dynamically in opposition from crashing into one another. The birth-force of the universe emanates from nothing, but not from something. If there is no local space for the birth-force virtual particles to actualize into something, it shall extinguish and reincorporate as the force to either attract or repel any two objects considered in relation to one another. Is this not the perfection of "Good Fences Make Good Neighbors?" Something like "The Holy Spirit?"
I can't imagine this doesn't take place in thought, as well, and therefore in our personalities, and therefore in society.
"A population that lacks the will to assert its rights neither deserves nor receives them."
I agree with your take except for the "deserves" part. That is the mindset of a true slave. Despite what we have been cornered into believing, the world we live in, and specifically the world of humankind, is one based on compassion. Through the ages we have tolerated the sociopaths who confuse themselves with society and "God," not out of cowardice, but out of compassion for them and our fellow man. It's only been the technology of the last few thousand years that has enabled these people to extend the reach of their malformed psyches to extend so far as to actually degrade our ability to support their fantasy world. We just can't handle the metastasis that they are any more and we have to remove these children from the fake pedestals on which they sit so that we can survive as a species.
Our mass media and Hollywood is swamped with slave-thought. The images we see of men, women, families, society, are all those of what a slave sees, but is in actuality the antithesis of what they are trying to portray.
We don't need to continue propagating their misinterpretations. It's time to come together and help them make a choice to either heal and move forward, or be shunned.
Just to clarify, by "slave" I do not mean those forced into labor, I mean those who think like a slave. This specifically excludes African-American history, because theirs is a history of resistance and hope in the face of covetous hateful tyranny. A true slave is one who forsakes hope, faith, truth, and therefore compassion, because compassion is the one thing that defines us as a group.
I read that at first as "Aqua Teen Hunger Force Treats Cornea Disorders"
.. .. .. .."
and then when I did a double take, the first two words looked to be "Adult Swim
Guess I need to cut down on my pointless animation intake! I say that with adoration, by the way.
I wouldn't say that text messaging is dumbing down kids, rather we simply have a better recording of just how stupid most kids let themselves be.
People in our demographic are much more academically educated and familiar with technology, so we are surprised by all their drivel. That's kind of why we're dorks, you know. It's nothing new, we just see it as different because they have to encode it into shitty phone keypads they have no control over, or interest in.
Seriously, don't you remember being far more interested in some new gadget an adult brought out, compared to any other kid around? That gives us a lot of motivation to meet the tech in the middle, by using whatever awfully designed interface just as completely as possible. That was (and is) a point of pride with me, anyway.
Am I the only one to be mightily impressed at the idea of implementing Expose in javascript??
I haven't looked yet at how well they accomplished this, but damn, I love the idea of having a common Expose-like function available to me on all the modern OS's I am forced to use daily.
If it's GPL'ed I will check it out.
Nobody has yet mentioned Kent.
4 6154
http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2001/08/
Kent wouldn't exist as a real American hero, if it wasn't for the villian, Venter, and his company Celera.
If not for Kent, the human genome would be patented right now by Celera, which would be one of the highest valued companies in the world due to the royalties that you and I would be paying right now and for the next fifteen years.
Make no mistake, this company is a real-life villian, and giving them this patent only means more economic hardship for you and I, even though I acknowledge that under current law they should be given the patent.
Erroneous "insights" such as these are pretty common in any context you can think of where hysteresis is inherent, and the observer is inside the hysteresis loop.
Circular thought process:
1) Gosh, it takes so much extra stuff to make my insecure system secure!
2) Why don't we just make the system secure in the first place, thereby eliminating the need?
3) Gosh, my newly secure system is really hard to use, practically useless!
4) Why don't I go back to the more usable system, since my recent experience has been so secure?
5) Gosh, my box has been owned!
6) Why don't I buy the newest extra security stuff to make my usable system more secure?
7) GOTO (1)
You could switch that with (to name a couple):
hot-cold/overdressed-underdressed
flush-tapped/skinflint-spendthrift
Our country is going through a particularly painful part of the freedom-tyranny/insecure-secure hysteresis loop right now.
These aren't concepts for which there is a solution, because separating oneself from the axes on which they lie is impossible and/or undesirable; you can't eliminate basic properties of a system without consequences.
A first glance I read the headline as: "Phil Spector Answers Your Questions."
My thought was "Wow, I didn't know Slashdotters were especially interested in a celebrity murder case!"
Both the RIAA and the MPAA manage to insert sufficient language into some unrelated bill (ala what they tried with the Patriot Act) that authorizes preemptive strikes against p2p networks, saying that they could serve as massive distributed attack vectors against our nation's cyber-infrastructure.
Flip forward a few weeks. I wake up on a typical Sunday like today and start up Azureus. Within a couple of minutes, a tomahawk cruise missile is launched from a regional military installation.
The upside of my imminent demise is my last minutes will be spent mellowly and obliviously perusing mininova, seeing if anyone uploaded a torrent for that one episode of The Daily Show I missed last Thursday.
If only I had stayed up past 10PM that night, I would never have brought this on myself.
right right. Then how did competition between the two during the days =386 play out? Was AMD just a physical supplier more for Europe?
Yeah I knew they were around, and I should have stated that, my implication by saying that they "weren't in the picture" was that they weren't in direct competition at that point, which I remembered as starting around the 486 days. Someone else just commented that this was a mistaken assumption, and I stand corrected.
My question to address this then is, if indeed AMD was a second source for the 8088 way from the beginning, how did the situation evolve such that Intel didn't suffer any competition until relatively recently? Why wasn't AMD doing the same thing back then?
I knew they were around, but I was under the possibly mistaken impression that they were not directly competing until around the 486 days. I may be thinking of how it turned out as a situation rather than how it was formally constructed. Thanks for letting me know this, I'll check this out.
Intel was a monopolist loooong before AMD was in the picture. We're talking 8086 on up.
Monopolists almost by definition do underhanded, unethical, and illegal things like these under-the-counter transactions, because without them the market would never have become theirs in the first place. That's why AMD and Transmeta could never be on a level playing field with Intel, they're just not corrupt enough. The myth that this is just healthy competition between like-minded companies needs to be dispelled over and over until everyone understands just what has gone on and is still going on today.
and you can do it too. Go for it and don't look back.
Intel is a horrible monopolist that needs to be dismantled. Let's hope this is a step in that direction.
...gentoo is *the* bleeding edge distro and is proud of that. Almost every CS major at the University of Chicago has it on their Thinkpad or Powerbook.
As for being unstable in regards to updating, I can only guess the submitter didn't configure his system correctly and allowed clearly labeled beta builds of server components into the automated upgrade queue. That's an irresponsible mistake only a newbie would make, and has nothing to do with the distro itself (or any distro for that matter).
I personally am an adherent to something akin to the RMS philosophy. I believe information wants to be free, and that patents and copyrights should be gradually phased back to their original very limited focus and scope.
That said, the facts show that Transmeta decided to play by the rules and compete in the chip business. The facts also show that they received the standard treatment from one of the two biggest technology monopolists of our age, Intel (our friend M$ being the other). Intel has a long history of anti-competitive illegal abuse of their dominant position in the marketplace.
We know this through contracts with distributors and partners that have been periodically leaked and reported on, as well as a mountain of articles detailing their abusive platform tie-ins and deceptive marketing techniques. A look at the current antitrust case brought by AMD alone is damning. Separately, each piece of the puzzle isn't blatantly illegal, but that's the game monopolists (and the mafia) play; it's hard to prove collusion and/or conspiracy.
If Transmeta had never successfully fabbed a chip, or had never found a major distribution partner, you could rightfully call them a troll. The important point is that even if this was the case, Intel still stole their technology and called it their own, and is liable for massive patent violations.
But that's not the case. Transmeta tried, made a pretty damn good go of it, and was squashed. I think the only part of this in dispute is if Transmeta could bring an antitrust case like AMD against Intel as well. I wish they would, because without companies like AMD and Transmeta, today we'd be paying $2000 for a (t)Itanic clocked at 300MHz or so with no backwards (32-bit) compatibility, power saving, or other performance innovations. Instead we get to pay $100-$200 for a multi-GHz chip with all these features.
Now Intel shows us exactly why they are the poster child for patent reform after rummaging through their bin of monopolist patent bombs for a few months and countersuing.
[1] And yes, I have told him to fix it. Even did the neighbourly thing and secured his network for for him. The following day he removed my configuration because "he didn't like entering a password". He'll learn the hard way eventually.
"The neighborly thing" you did was the only blatantly illegal act anyone has mentioned in this thread.
First illegal act: You logged into his AP over HTTP by entering a username and a password, that you guessed because it was probably the default but is still technically "using false credentials to gain access" and also probably "criminal unauthorized access."
Second illegal act: You changed his router configuration without permission which immediately caused your neighbor a DoS on his own network! That's the kind of act these companies claim millions of damage for, when some idiot kid logs into their system and changes some config file. He then had to go THROUGH YOU in order to access his network again. Extortion? Protection?
Ironically, you first did exactly what you wrote that others should go to jail for, namely access his network at all. That's the one thing you did that wasn't definitely illegal.
I think you confuse what you perceive as moral as being lawful and/or ethical, when you haven't thought through your own moral-justification behavior. You're even criticizing others for the same exact behavior. Why?
And what about just plain-old invasion of privacy?
Your words echo an understandable concern in letting the pendulum swing too far the other way. The maximum-entropy result you describe is just as undesirable as the copyright-and-patent-your-fart extreme that exists today.
As I said before, incremental steps in the direction of FOSS could be taken by all that would not jeopardize your livelihood below a perfectly reasonable amount.
Side note: professors write books all the time for free, mostly in the form of contributed chapters.