That's a reasonable argument, but I think you're missing the fact that correcting entries is part and parcel of what wikipedia is all about. I applaud people for testing that system. If we had more journalists who actually investigated things, maybe the media wouldn't have let the voting system become compromised, and wouldn't have let thousands of people die in iraq without mentioning it much.
Vandalising a wall with something relatively permanent is a different issue to this kind of investigation, though. A closer analogy would be something like calling a news station and reporting a false news item, or setting up a fake corruption incident, to see whether the media catches it. Sadly, they're more likely to add weight to such things these days, given how they just repeat press releases word for word most of the time.
I heard once (from a very media-knowledgeable friend) that Transformers also had roots in Anime. Not sure if he meant it was developed by Japanese animators/houses, or if it just took inspiration from that, though.
On the movie sucking.. yeah, I agree. I've no idea what made them choose wirey robots over the old-style solid ones.
I don't think we can call this "government corruption" although we may like to believe it
No one likes to believe that the government which takes so much of their earnings is corrupt. It's like admitting you've been some bully's plaything for years, and always will be. That doesn't make it untrue. In many countries, everyone KNOWS their government is corrupt: local officials live nearby, and everyone knows them, and sees when they suddenly change their minds etc. In the west, we like to pretend our governments are the bastion of civilisation, and that any time corruption happens, it's an isolated incident by some bad apple. In fact, it seems more like corruption is widespread, but people (even those involved) just don't realise it, because it's painted up so sweetly with spin and seemingly high-minded ways for politicians to tell themselves they're doing the right thing.
because this is a very serious charge and if proven and a conviction is made then someone is looking at a serious fine or jail time.
Thing is, many people don't understand the GPL. The GPL never said 'you must distribute your source code to everyone'... you can, for example, make private changes and never give them out. In fact, this is explicitly given as an example of an important freedom by Stallman, Moglen, etc. Similarly, you have the freedom to make changes and give them to only a few people; this is exactly what MySQL are doing. Now, the people that do receive the code are free to further distribute it, according to the GPL, and I am sure we will see the code in some manner (compare to CentOS). But MySQL are well within their legal (and moral) rights to have only part of their GPLed code available on their servers in tarball format for anonymous download.
This is essentially my understanding as well -- except for the "within their..moral...rights" part. I think the spirit of the license is clearly to encourage distribution, and if/when you're using other GPL code, or even just purporting to release code under that license (and thereby inviting certain people to use it -- under a contract) then you're misrepresenting yourself if you aren't going to stick to the principles of that license, even if you do stick to the word of it.
Oh, don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that religious texts have no spiritual worth. I wouldn't dream of saying that about any religious text, including the bible, even though personally, I'm a buddhist.
Yours is an interesting interpretation too; I'll have to give the story another read some time:)
If it's owned by the state isn't it public domain?
Like those Public Domain nukes george has?;)
States own lots of things, under very non-public licenses. Sometimes for safety/security, sometimes for lack of foresight, sometimes through lack of interest by state officials in doing the right thing, sometimes through blatant corruption.
Linux does NOT stand for free software. It happens to have a (now old and relatively flawed) free software license. The main direction for Linux comes from a guy who likes Tivoisation (ie, DRM), and is of the opinion that politics like Freedom issues don't matter; he just wants to create tools.
If you want a Free Software kernel, that guarantees you'll still be able to use it at version 11.6, you'll need to look further afield.
You could argue that kernels don't matter much anyway, as long as they're posix, and that's true, to an extent, but most desktops are now embracing HAL, etc., which are linux-specific.
This kind of thing always makes me wonder about the origin of tales that probably come to us from pre-history -- stuff like the Cain and Abel story. I can't help thinking that, at one time, these stories might have told of some much more important historical event than one brother killing another, and that, slowly, over time, they've been watered down into something that everyone understood in their current context -- one guy killing another.
Of course, GNU have said that "LPGL represents a retreat for [them]", so getting "acceptance" of GNOME through that route doesn't really count as winning any sort of Free Software battle.
If you think that KDE's framework doesn't provide cool features, you haven't given it a thorough try yet. KDE constantly surprises me with nice touches, that I discover just by thinking, "I've never seen a desktop do it before, but it would be great if I could click here and do..." and it works!
If we're referring to the same thing, then I hear it's mainly due to lack of double-buffering for drawing. Qt4 (and thus, KDE4) actually has this, and still flickers when resizing windows etc., though. It may also require enabling double-buffering in X; not sure. GNOME doesn't, so it does seem like a Qt (rather than KDE) issue still.
Another issue is surely the GUI styling. Part of the problem there was perhaps that KDE 3 drew an extra set of frames that made things look cluttered. This is no longer done in KDE4, afaik. I know for certain that it was removed from one or two pieces of software, at least, and probably them all. Finally, I don't think the styles have enough contrast to their edges.
Anyway... I agree, KDE is a GREAT desktop despite this. GUI appearance "solidity" is one of the one of the few things GNOME gets right, imho (others are Pango, accessibility, and (at least getting behind a project LIKE) GStreamer). However, KDE wins hands-down for me, for many other, less superficial reasons. I always liked KDE's old motto, "a desktop for grown-ups". And it is.
This can hardly be called FUD. They destroyed at least one man's career in government -- probably two mens'. Who knows what else they did to get this through, and head off a pan-american shift away from MS products.
Those are all good points, but the main problem I see with biometrics is that it puts humans rather than keys/cards/ids between the criminal and their target. With previous tech, the criminal could just wait until no one is around, and steal their keys/cards/tokens. With this approach, the criminal is much more likely to resort to putting a weapon in someone's face, and forcing them to assist in a crime. With a sufficiently principled person, that could lead to death.
1: That's a licensing issue. If you're deciding that everyone is incapable of it without giving them the chance to get a license, then you're part of the problem.
2: Brake failure at high speed can be pretty disastrous, too. As can drunk driving, drug driving, etc. I think the main reason for deaths on our roads is probably the overcrowding, though, which 3d vehicles are at least a step away from.
3: Cost is a valid concern, of course. But, the usual capitalist model is that enthusiasts or at least rich people buy first, thus jumpstarting the technology and reducing prices for everyone else. Why don't even rich people have them?
4: This is exactly the kind of reasoning that I'm arguing is holding things back.
5: I'm sure the first cars were pretty noisy too. Most early machines are. That's no reason for a technology to be virtually non-existent. Limited to hobbyists, maybe.
There was talk a while back of beaming microwave energy to earth from solar-power-collecting satellites, since they're outside the atmosphere, and in the sun at times when other spots on earth aren't. The moon might also fit into that satellite model, except that it's further away.
I don't really see the problem with leaving devices on "standby". I'm not an electronics type, but it can't take that much power for a small IR receiver circuit to flick the power on for the main circuitry. The only problem with that is that governments allow people to sell goods where "standby" means "don't show a picture until they press a button". Other (PC-like) devices are starting to have extended startup times, and so standby is starting to mean "keep memory running, but don't show a picture...". Maybe what we need is to differentiate between "sleep" mode and "remote power-on" mode.
Has anyone else noticed that they now have robot planes that can be flown from the other side of the world, and shoot missiles at people on the ground, but yet the average citizen's flying car is yet to materialize? Now we're being told that they have to make cars smaller to make 'em run on batteries, even with fuel cell technology etc.
Seems to me that there might be something going on here besides technological limitations. I wonder when governments realised it would be hard to track and chase people who could travel in three dimensions easily?
Slashdot Mirror
That's a reasonable argument, but I think you're missing the fact that correcting entries is part and parcel of what wikipedia is all about. I applaud people for testing that system. If we had more journalists who actually investigated things, maybe the media wouldn't have let the voting system become compromised, and wouldn't have let thousands of people die in iraq without mentioning it much.
Vandalising a wall with something relatively permanent is a different issue to this kind of investigation, though. A closer analogy would be something like calling a news station and reporting a false news item, or setting up a fake corruption incident, to see whether the media catches it. Sadly, they're more likely to add weight to such things these days, given how they just repeat press releases word for word most of the time.
I heard once (from a very media-knowledgeable friend) that Transformers also had roots in Anime. Not sure if he meant it was developed by Japanese animators/houses, or if it just took inspiration from that, though.
On the movie sucking.. yeah, I agree. I've no idea what made them choose wirey robots over the old-style solid ones.
It would be fine if there was a functional version of this:
texttospeech --output-format simplehtml vid.txt
No one likes to believe that the government which takes so much of their earnings is corrupt. It's like admitting you've been some bully's plaything for years, and always will be. That doesn't make it untrue. In many countries, everyone KNOWS their government is corrupt: local officials live nearby, and everyone knows them, and sees when they suddenly change their minds etc. In the west, we like to pretend our governments are the bastion of civilisation, and that any time corruption happens, it's an isolated incident by some bad apple. In fact, it seems more like corruption is widespread, but people (even those involved) just don't realise it, because it's painted up so sweetly with spin and seemingly high-minded ways for politicians to tell themselves they're doing the right thing.
Good. About time.
I didn't say HAL was "part" of Linux, I said it was Linux-specific. From http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/hal:
Dependencies
Linux kernel 2.6.15 (or later)
This is essentially my understanding as well -- except for the "within their..moral...rights" part. I think the spirit of the license is clearly to encourage distribution, and if/when you're using other GPL code, or even just purporting to release code under that license (and thereby inviting certain people to use it -- under a contract) then you're misrepresenting yourself if you aren't going to stick to the principles of that license, even if you do stick to the word of it.
Oh, don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that religious texts have no spiritual worth. I wouldn't dream of saying that about any religious text, including the bible, even though personally, I'm a buddhist.
:)
Yours is an interesting interpretation too; I'll have to give the story another read some time
Like those Public Domain nukes george has?
States own lots of things, under very non-public licenses. Sometimes for safety/security, sometimes for lack of foresight, sometimes through lack of interest by state officials in doing the right thing, sometimes through blatant corruption.
Linux does NOT stand for free software. It happens to have a (now old and relatively flawed) free software license. The main direction for Linux comes from a guy who likes Tivoisation (ie, DRM), and is of the opinion that politics like Freedom issues don't matter; he just wants to create tools.
If you want a Free Software kernel, that guarantees you'll still be able to use it at version 11.6, you'll need to look further afield.
You could argue that kernels don't matter much anyway, as long as they're posix, and that's true, to an extent, but most desktops are now embracing HAL, etc., which are linux-specific.
Unfortunately politics is the only place where problems never get solved.
This kind of thing always makes me wonder about the origin of tales that probably come to us from pre-history -- stuff like the Cain and Abel story. I can't help thinking that, at one time, these stories might have told of some much more important historical event than one brother killing another, and that, slowly, over time, they've been watered down into something that everyone understood in their current context -- one guy killing another.
Of course, GNU have said that "LPGL represents a retreat for [them]", so getting "acceptance" of GNOME through that route doesn't really count as winning any sort of Free Software battle.
Liferea? Over Akregator? That's no way to convert people.
If you think that KDE's framework doesn't provide cool features, you haven't given it a thorough try yet. KDE constantly surprises me with nice touches, that I discover just by thinking, "I've never seen a desktop do it before, but it would be great if I could click here and do..." and it works!
If we're referring to the same thing, then I hear it's mainly due to lack of double-buffering for drawing. Qt4 (and thus, KDE4) actually has this, and still flickers when resizing windows etc., though. It may also require enabling double-buffering in X; not sure. GNOME doesn't, so it does seem like a Qt (rather than KDE) issue still.
Another issue is surely the GUI styling. Part of the problem there was perhaps that KDE 3 drew an extra set of frames that made things look cluttered. This is no longer done in KDE4, afaik. I know for certain that it was removed from one or two pieces of software, at least, and probably them all. Finally, I don't think the styles have enough contrast to their edges.
Anyway... I agree, KDE is a GREAT desktop despite this. GUI appearance "solidity" is one of the one of the few things GNOME gets right, imho (others are Pango, accessibility, and (at least getting behind a project LIKE) GStreamer). However, KDE wins hands-down for me, for many other, less superficial reasons. I always liked KDE's old motto, "a desktop for grown-ups". And it is.
Actually, that's pretty insightful. Which is better: learning something, or learning what you've been learning?
With physical property, that's how it works in court, too. Give someone a gift, and it belongs to them, not you.
I think you meant "...waves his new puppet's hands..."
This can hardly be called FUD. They destroyed at least one man's career in government -- probably two mens'. Who knows what else they did to get this through, and head off a pan-american shift away from MS products.
Ahh, so it's more for sun exposure, than for avoidance of atmospheric interference?
:)
Thanks
Those are all good points, but the main problem I see with biometrics is that it puts humans rather than keys/cards/ids between the criminal and their target. With previous tech, the criminal could just wait until no one is around, and steal their keys/cards/tokens. With this approach, the criminal is much more likely to resort to putting a weapon in someone's face, and forcing them to assist in a crime. With a sufficiently principled person, that could lead to death.
On:
1: That's a licensing issue. If you're deciding that everyone is incapable of it without giving them the chance to get a license, then you're part of the problem.
2: Brake failure at high speed can be pretty disastrous, too. As can drunk driving, drug driving, etc. I think the main reason for deaths on our roads is probably the overcrowding, though, which 3d vehicles are at least a step away from.
3: Cost is a valid concern, of course. But, the usual capitalist model is that enthusiasts or at least rich people buy first, thus jumpstarting the technology and reducing prices for everyone else. Why don't even rich people have them?
4: This is exactly the kind of reasoning that I'm arguing is holding things back.
5: I'm sure the first cars were pretty noisy too. Most early machines are. That's no reason for a technology to be virtually non-existent. Limited to hobbyists, maybe.
There was talk a while back of beaming microwave energy to earth from solar-power-collecting satellites, since they're outside the atmosphere, and in the sun at times when other spots on earth aren't. The moon might also fit into that satellite model, except that it's further away.
I don't really see the problem with leaving devices on "standby". I'm not an electronics type, but it can't take that much power for a small IR receiver circuit to flick the power on for the main circuitry. The only problem with that is that governments allow people to sell goods where "standby" means "don't show a picture until they press a button". Other (PC-like) devices are starting to have extended startup times, and so standby is starting to mean "keep memory running, but don't show a picture...". Maybe what we need is to differentiate between "sleep" mode and "remote power-on" mode.
Has anyone else noticed that they now have robot planes that can be flown from the other side of the world, and shoot missiles at people on the ground, but yet the average citizen's flying car is yet to materialize? Now we're being told that they have to make cars smaller to make 'em run on batteries, even with fuel cell technology etc.
Seems to me that there might be something going on here besides technological limitations. I wonder when governments realised it would be hard to track and chase people who could travel in three dimensions easily?