The US used to run to the next advanced area to stay ahead. Now there are very few areas where that is true.
So people are commodities. Even rocket scientists are increasingly common.
As a result our economies are averaging out. The chinese rocket scientist makes twice as much this year and is up from $15000 to $25,000 this year. The US rocket scientists wages stagnate and go from $103,000 to $102,000.
Another problem we face is-- the US is safe and you can own property. So people will pay lots of money for california property, colorado property, etc. As more people get rich, the US is competing with the rich of the entire world to live in the US. California housing prices are a perfect example-- $700k for a house is ridiculous if you net $50k a year after taxes.
Yes but just because microsoft word is the standard, doesn't mean that some OOo interface changes are not intuitive (such as page setup- why is it on the file menu? because it always has been... really it should be on the formatting menu).
However, I find Gimp very painful after using Corel and Picture Perfect which both use more similar metaphors to Adobe I think.
I'll try gimp again with 2.4 but I expect to bounce off again.
I wish there was a way to select the features you want active and ONLY those options would display.
For example, today I want to color balance and morph. Tomorrow, I want to cut and paste parts of the picture around (which is where GIMP is most often painful for me- somehow the cut and paste model isn't intuitive to me).
Some perfectly smart people do not experience fear. Other perfectly smart people experience joy instead of fear in situations that most of us are afraid.
Being afraid or enjoying danger are not factors of intelligence tho I admit some people are too stupid to know they are in trouble until it is too late or they may not recognize something is dangerous like a live wire.
I agree. My point is that current lawyers learn a lot in school and for the Bar. They have a closed guild that holds down numbers (apparently breaking down) and so do doctors (very transparently- they openly discuss quotas and not creating 'too many' doctors).
If you had "divorce lawyer" trade school, then you could learn to be a divorce lawyer for $5k. You would charge $50 an hour instead of $300 an hour.
I agree that attorneys are vitally needed. Divorces are a perfect example of where it can start out nice (file your own forms!) and then descend into hell (lost the kids & property, kept the bills) unpredictably. Any case where people are competing - they tend to bend the rules and the need for precision suddenly rears its ugly head.
Most legal activity should not be performed by lawyers.
Just as business people simplify IT that requires specialists and is repetative, we should simplify legal activities that require specilists but happen repetatively.
Seriously-- 99% of divorces could be handled by a "divorce specialist" who would make 60 grand a year instead of 120 grand a year. Law has gotten so big, it needs to be broken down and streamlined.
That's because that is the values you were trained with.
Read 1984. You can destroy people so completely that they would rather die than going on living without actually hurting them physically.
The only way to avoid being injured in this way is to have no values. If you tell your friends "I'll be faithful to you unless I get any heat" then you won't feel bad when you betray them- heck they won't fault you for it.
Famous anecdote I heard was for a while they said they would bury terrorists with dead pigs. This caused them to stop for a while because by their training they would not go to heaven if this happened. Apparently the training has changed or the practice has stopped. But the point is they feared this weird emotional thing more than blowing themselves up.
He wants it to be free, but he also wants to be able to still "own" it and restrict how it is used.
When I give a free hammer to someone, I don't say they can only build free houses with it.
When I put code in the public domain- there it is- everyone can use it. Both people who will improve it and keep free versions of it out in the wild and businesses that will compile it and charge for it.
Section 73.12 Network communications will use the LikeDos63 format.
Section 110.42 Shared disk communications will check for the SAMBA tag. If true, return "network device driver" error.
Section 173.01
Packet Aw1: We don't even know what purpose this serves any more. However, one must be with every message or after 10 hours a memory leak starts.
Packet Zzz: This puts the message reader to sleep for a few seconds. One must be sent each hour or weird problems develop. It looks like it gives the message processor time to catch up.
Section 174.13 Check for media windows player version 13 and WGA confirmation before sending messages. If either fails, disable the subsystem.
In fact, most music follows some very predictable patterns. A friend and I freaked out another friend by humming along with a new song. It was a good song and as soon as you heard each note, you knew what the next note had to be.
So you don't have to copyright the "noise". There still may be a lot of songs but as someone else said- get them copyrighted (and then release them to the public domain). Then musicians can get back to arranging instruments and interesting variations of those songs.
Are you arguing that no modern copyrighted music duplicates any existing public domain music?
We have set note lengths and a fixed number of notes. I know for sure I've heard long parts of old country and folk songs in new rock and roll songs.
It irritates me that a rock musician will get all pissy because another musician "stole their song" when it is likely that they have done the same things themselves.
I don't care that things are killed. It bothers me that we are killing these things for entertainment.
How about the "24 hour kill a chicken network" or the "24 hour dogs fighting to the death" network?
Death is a natural part of life. It doesn't matter if we kill the cow, or let it die of old age. It does matter if we make a show about "how badly can we injure cows before they finally die" show.
Could not the existing public domain music melody sequences be compared to current copyrighted works and be shown to have already be written in public domain music?
They are suing for 12 sequence notes these days- I think it is likely that many 12 sequence notes are already public domain. All it needs is some computer crunching between still copyrighted songs and public domain songs to compare them.
They don't bother me. I understand a lot of people feel we are at war with bacteria which are out to kill us. The same is true for cockroaches. Lysol, raid and others are trying to get us to pick their weapon in the war.
I don't have a problem with killing vermin invading my space. However, I don't film it and put it on Youtube to entertain others. I might film it and put it on Youtube to instruct others. The intent behind basically the same action is the difference between good and evil.
However, I do not torment it or torture it before I eat it. Killing to live is part of life. Even vegetarians kill plants to live. It's a question of intent. The point of this mythbuster activity is not to prove that cockroaches can survive radiation- it is to entertain us and get us to watch them so they will get ratings.
Next up-- what about that myth that cat's land on their feet regardless of the height of the fall? They can drop them from increasing altitudes from 1' to 1000'.
Smart people are wrong 85% of the time when it comes to the free market. Only 15% of managers consistently beat the market- and even they may just be having a 20 year long lucky streak.
I agree that muslims are much more extremist than christians.
However i think you ignore ireland (catholics) vs britain (protestants), the hugonauts (protestant) vs the french (catholics), the many christian groups in 3rd world countries around the world today vs muslim groups in those same groups (killing each other).
Please don't cop out and say they are not christians if they kill people (or lie, or have affairs, etc.).
My experience is that moderate and 1950's hollywood christian values are very positive. A majority of christians are kind people and try to turn the other cheek and so on.
But some of them are assholes who shoot doctors, burn down mosques, hang black people, fire jewish people, secretly think the holocaust was a good thing, ostracize friends and relatives who do not believe, and even wiggle on the floor gibbering "speaking in tongues".
As a non-believer, I disagree with your overly-negative view of religion.
There are easily observable very significant evolutionary benefits to being religious.
Religious communities tend to create an artificial "monkey tribe" and support procreation by the members of the tribe. This makes it easier for different real tribes to merge if they share the same religion. Many religions have strong procreation and marriage values. As we have dropped their religious values because they were painful for us individually, we have seen procreation rates decline along with a sense of common values. Without common values as the glue to hold us together (even stupid common values) we have to be a lot more explicit about our laws.
Religious communities give free things to each other including food, housing, child-care, even cars. And the charity is usually very wisely targeted compared to government programs-- the spendthrift loser is cut off while the community turns out to help the family that lost their house or is suffering from a mid-term illness.
Atheism can be used as a religion too and has resulted in the death of millions of people (Russia, esp Stalin). Mildly not believing in supernatural things or mildly believing in supernatural things seems okay. Strongly believing in either can lead to bad things.
If they are a common carrier then they can't "evict" people selectively based on content. If they are not a common carrier they are subject to being sued for not controlling content on their network.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the problem is more basic.
The US used to run to the next advanced area to stay ahead. Now there are very few areas where that is true.
So people are commodities. Even rocket scientists are increasingly common.
As a result our economies are averaging out. The chinese rocket scientist makes twice as much this year and is up from $15000 to $25,000 this year. The US rocket scientists wages stagnate and go from $103,000 to $102,000.
Another problem we face is-- the US is safe and you can own property. So people will pay lots of money for california property, colorado property, etc. As more people get rich, the US is competing with the rich of the entire world to live in the US. California housing prices are a perfect example-- $700k for a house is ridiculous if you net $50k a year after taxes.
The version I have heard is
If I give you three cookies, you are overjoyed!
until you find out i gave bob four cookies. Then you are sad and pissed off again.
Yes but just because microsoft word is the standard, doesn't mean that some OOo interface changes are not intuitive (such as page setup- why is it on the file menu? because it always has been... really it should be on the formatting menu).
However, I find Gimp very painful after using Corel and Picture Perfect which both use more similar metaphors to Adobe I think.
I'll try gimp again with 2.4 but I expect to bounce off again.
I wish there was a way to select the features you want active and ONLY those options would display.
For example, today I want to color balance and morph. Tomorrow, I want to cut and paste parts of the picture around (which is where GIMP is most often painful for me- somehow the cut and paste model isn't intuitive to me).
Some perfectly smart people do not experience fear.
Other perfectly smart people experience joy instead of fear in situations that most of us are afraid.
Being afraid or enjoying danger are not factors of intelligence tho I admit some people are too stupid to know they are in trouble until it is too late or they may not recognize something is dangerous like a live wire.
You can get yourself in so much trouble so fast this way.
Part of what a lawyer does is keep you from using wishful thinking.
I agree. My point is that current lawyers learn a lot in school and for the Bar. They have a closed guild that holds down numbers (apparently breaking down) and so do doctors (very transparently- they openly discuss quotas and not creating 'too many' doctors).
If you had "divorce lawyer" trade school, then you could learn to be a divorce lawyer for $5k. You would charge $50 an hour instead of $300 an hour.
I agree that attorneys are vitally needed. Divorces are a perfect example of where it can start out nice (file your own forms!) and then descend into hell (lost the kids & property, kept the bills) unpredictably. Any case where people are competing - they tend to bend the rules and the need for precision suddenly rears its ugly head.
Most legal activity should not be performed by lawyers.
Just as business people simplify IT that requires specialists and is repetative, we should simplify legal activities that require specilists but happen repetatively.
Seriously-- 99% of divorces could be handled by a "divorce specialist" who would make 60 grand a year instead of 120 grand a year. Law has gotten so big, it needs to be broken down and streamlined.
Partially it is perception man.
..er.. 200,000 now).
At 25 cents a gallon, gas was as expensive or more expensive than gas today at $2.46.
A new car was about three grand (vs 36,000 now)
A new house was about 16 grand (vs 160,000
I agree tho- fun muscle cars are gone.
---
The biggest problem is you have so many more things to spend your money on today. Back then, you did not have as many options.
That's because that is the values you were trained with.
Read 1984. You can destroy people so completely that they would rather die than going on living without actually hurting them physically.
The only way to avoid being injured in this way is to have no values. If you tell your friends "I'll be faithful to you unless I get any heat" then you won't feel bad when you betray them- heck they won't fault you for it.
Famous anecdote I heard was for a while they said they would bury terrorists with dead pigs. This caused them to stop for a while because by their training they would not go to heaven if this happened. Apparently the training has changed or the practice has stopped. But the point is they feared this weird emotional thing more than blowing themselves up.
However it is a bit of a hole in his thinking.
He wants it to be free, but he also wants to be able to still "own" it and restrict how it is used.
When I give a free hammer to someone, I don't say they can only build free houses with it.
When I put code in the public domain- there it is- everyone can use it. Both people who will improve it and keep free versions of it out in the wild and businesses that will compile it and charge for it.
A few key excerpts of the specifications...
Section 73.12
Network communications will use the LikeDos63 format.
Section 110.42
Shared disk communications will check for the SAMBA tag. If true, return "network device driver" error.
Section 173.01
Packet Aw1: We don't even know what purpose this serves any more. However, one must be with every message or after 10 hours a memory leak starts.
Packet Zzz: This puts the message reader to sleep for a few seconds. One must be sent each hour or weird problems develop. It looks like it gives the message processor time to catch up.
Section 174.13
Check for media windows player version 13 and WGA confirmation before sending messages. If either fails, disable the subsystem.
etc...
In fact, most music follows some very predictable patterns. A friend and I freaked out another friend by humming along with a new song. It was a good song and as soon as you heard each note, you knew what the next note had to be.
So you don't have to copyright the "noise". There still may be a lot of songs but as someone else said- get them copyrighted (and then release them to the public domain). Then musicians can get back to arranging instruments and interesting variations of those songs.
Typical MPAA/Riaa deal making.
I'm sure his $15million check was cut due to various fees. His final cut was $15,000.
Crime has been rampant throughout history.
In areas of low technology you can commit crimes and leave without a trace-- start your life over.
Technology may increase the potential size of the payoff.
But increase the likelyhood? No.
I see your point.
Are you arguing that no modern copyrighted music duplicates any existing public domain music?
We have set note lengths and a fixed number of notes. I know for sure I've heard long parts of old country and folk songs in new rock and roll songs.
It irritates me that a rock musician will get all pissy because another musician "stole their song" when it is likely that they have done the same things themselves.
I think you are missing the point.
I don't care that things are killed. It bothers me that we are killing these things for entertainment.
How about the "24 hour kill a chicken network" or the "24 hour dogs fighting to the death" network?
Death is a natural part of life. It doesn't matter if we kill the cow, or let it die of old age. It does matter if we make a show about "how badly can we injure cows before they finally die" show.
Could not the existing public domain music melody sequences be compared to current copyrighted works and be shown to have already be written in public domain music?
They are suing for 12 sequence notes these days- I think it is likely that many 12 sequence notes are already public domain. All it needs is some computer crunching between still copyrighted songs and public domain songs to compare them.
They don't bother me. I understand a lot of people feel we are at war with bacteria which are out to kill us. The same is true for cockroaches. Lysol, raid and others are trying to get us to pick their weapon in the war.
I don't have a problem with killing vermin invading my space. However, I don't film it and put it on Youtube to entertain others. I might film it and put it on Youtube to instruct others. The intent behind basically the same action is the difference between good and evil.
No.
I enjoy the food I eat.
However, I do not torment it or torture it before I eat it. Killing to live is part of life. Even vegetarians kill plants to live. It's a question of intent. The point of this mythbuster activity is not to prove that cockroaches can survive radiation- it is to entertain us and get us to watch them so they will get ratings.
Next up-- what about that myth that cat's land on their feet regardless of the height of the fall? They can drop them from increasing altitudes from 1' to 1000'.
This bothers me because they are essentially going to be killing living things to entertain us.
Sure it's just insects who i would happily squash if they crawled on me. But it feels evil to kill things for a TV show.
Smart people are wrong 85% of the time when it comes to the free market.
Only 15% of managers consistently beat the market- and even they may just be having a 20 year long lucky streak.
I agree that muslims are much more extremist than christians.
However i think you ignore ireland (catholics) vs britain (protestants), the hugonauts (protestant) vs the french (catholics), the many christian groups in 3rd world countries around the world today vs muslim groups in those same groups (killing each other).
Please don't cop out and say they are not christians if they kill people (or lie, or have affairs, etc.).
My experience is that moderate and 1950's hollywood christian values are very positive. A majority of christians are kind people and try to turn the other cheek and so on.
But some of them are assholes who shoot doctors, burn down mosques, hang black people, fire jewish people, secretly think the holocaust was a good thing, ostracize friends and relatives who do not believe, and even wiggle on the floor gibbering "speaking in tongues".
As a non-believer, I disagree with your overly-negative view of religion.
There are easily observable very significant evolutionary benefits to being religious.
Religious communities tend to create an artificial "monkey tribe" and support procreation by the members of the tribe. This makes it easier for different real tribes to merge if they share the same religion. Many religions have strong procreation and marriage values. As we have dropped their religious values because they were painful for us individually, we have seen procreation rates decline along with a sense of common values. Without common values as the glue to hold us together (even stupid common values) we have to be a lot more explicit about our laws.
Religious communities give free things to each other including food, housing, child-care, even cars. And the charity is usually very wisely targeted compared to government programs-- the spendthrift loser is cut off while the community turns out to help the family that lost their house or is suffering from a mid-term illness.
Atheism can be used as a religion too and has resulted in the death of millions of people (Russia, esp Stalin). Mildly not believing in supernatural things or mildly believing in supernatural things seems okay. Strongly believing in either can lead to bad things.
If they are a common carrier then they can't "evict" people selectively based on content.
If they are not a common carrier they are subject to being sued for not controlling content on their network.
Which is it?
Not better. Just passes on genes more often.
Deer use this strategy fairly well until they all die off due to overpopulation.