I advise teaching drama instead of history.;)
Natural rights and human rights began during the English Enlightenment of the 18th century, spurred by the English Bill of Rights of 1689, and expanded on by philosophers such as Hobbes, Locke etc. Jefferson and Franklin and Paine had widely read the English, French and Scottish philosophers of the Enlightenment, and pulled together the Declaration and the Constitution mostly from their common-law heritage and Enlightenment philosophers. Portraying them as creating the wave rather than riding it is misleading.
What reason could you possibly have for trying to prevent in-flight modification of a video file you are distributing and making available constantly to millions of users? I mean, other than pure bureaucratic or incompetent waste?
You're right, although you should ignore the last Bond movie to complete your analogy -- a nice, gritty, back to the roots type reboot of the series. Whereas Windows seems to be showing quite the opposite development with Vista.
Elinks (don't know about links) does support iframes. The support is actually very neatly and intuitively done, if you are used to vim windows. They don't implement CSS though.
The Goodies, although funnier than Python, were sadly strangled by BBC2's controller, Jane Root, who refused to repeat them or release them. Thus, they were never syndicated to the U.S. on a large scale, nor did they see more than 5 or 6 episodes released out of some 94... It's a real shame.
No, that is incorrect. The Crown has a specific meaning, it refers to the functions of the head of state and is largely a distinct term from the government. When you want to refer to the government (as in this case), you would use "HMG" or "the government". Using "the Crown" is simply incorrect. I'm sorry, but anyone who moderated my post above as Troll simply does not understand the (admittedly subtle) difference. By the way, I'm not British.
What on Earth has this got to do with the Crown? Are you just an American highschooler who hasn't gotten past the War of Independence in your history classes?
You're trolling. The figures are taken from news.bbc.co.uk, which is perfectly Linux-friendly. I use that site every day, accessing it from Mozilla Firefox on Linux, ELinks on Linux, lynx on Linux (the lo-fi version), Snownews (the RSS feed) on Linux. I play the videos using the Flash plugin which took a click to install on my 32-bit system with Firefox, and I listen to the audio news using the Helix Player (Real) or mplayer from the command-line, again both on Linux. The BBC News website and various other sites such as H2G2 or BBC Comedy are extraordinarily Linux-friendly (because they are standards-based and accessible). The iPlayer seems to be the only Linux-unfriendly portion of their site, but again, that is not where the statistics come from.
The BBC's coverage of the story is as usual far less sensational and more informative: "The pictures had been manipulated to disguise the man's face with a swirl pattern, but computer specialists at Germany's federal police agency, the BKA, worked with Interpol's human trafficking team to produce identifiable images.". The other news (that story is from yesterday) is that there have already been quite a few reported sightings, although naturally most are probably just overreactions.
This is (yet another) good reason for not basing one's actions, beliefs and decisions on emotion, but rather on reason. I myself am religious, but from a pragmatic starting point, i.e. I do not base my beliefs on feeling, but on what I classify as evidence. Before you ask, yes, I have a good grasp of statistics and human behaviour, but believe in a God nevertheless.
Thanks for clarifying your position on the free market.
Still, that doesn't change the fact that excluding monopolies is not against the definition of a free market. The free market simply dictates that prices are arranged by the mutual consent of the traders, based on the laws of supply and demand. For any good or service in which the law of supply and demand means that an item which can be supplied by only one entity is in demand, you have a natural monopoly. Admittedly this doesn't apply to software, so I agree that Microsoft has subverted the software free market. However, in general for free markets, there is nothing that goes against monopolies.
Oho, that's just where you're wrong. Yes, it is. A free market even encourages monopolies, which must be dealt with by governments with monopoly laws, and enforced case-by-case with lawsuits.
A free market with a monopoly in it is not a very good market. But it is a free market nonetheless. You're committing the "No True Scotsman" fallacy in thus praising the free market.
Precisely: because you've gotten to know the right set, not for any reasons of academic quality.
Not that this has ever been any different in the US or most other countries of the world. The aristocracy tend to hang together; in the US the aristocrat kids do it in the Ivy League. It's jus money-based rather than title-based aristocracy these days.
He didn't say fashion, he said (admittedly imprecise) "nice apparel". Society's average everyday dress style changes extremely slowly. Take neckwear. A modern tie is tied in much the same fashion as it was in the 1880s (although the collar has changed), and waistcoats date to the 17th century. A person's everyday dress is unlikely to change over their lifetime, so clothing standards are perpetuated. If you dress today like people usually dressed in the 1930s (not in films or on events: in the everydays), you won't be too much out of place, although it might be old-fashioned. If you dress today like people in the everydays did in the 1950s or 1960s, you won't be out of place at all.
To be brief, dressing (in the sense of total appearance) conventionally is cheap, easy and stable.
It only requires a modicum more effort than dressing with corporate freebies. It is usually just marginally more expensive, and usually even cheaper if you don't mind thrift stores or straight razors (which I certainly don't). I've bought every tie I own for one dollar at thrift stores, my shirts are inherited, and I shave with a bar of soap replaced every 4-6 months and a $5 straight razor. I generally look perfectly conventional in Europe (where I am from), and slightly toff on the U.S. West Coast, but I don't mind that, as it helps a great deal with hiring.;)
From the credit card application:
"In order to use our Financial Services credit applications, you will need to have a browser that supports Javascript and standard 128 Bit SSL encryption such as Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 or higher, or AOL 8.0 or higher."
Mildly ironic.
It only took about 200 years, quite literally... It also depends on where you draw the line with horse taming. Horses were the major form of transport before the industrial revolution, but that isn't to say that huge advances in metallurgy, etc. had not occurred. Just pointing this out as many people underestimate the magnitude of the change the Victorian era brought.
They could opt to just release BBC content (that they own the copryights to) on the 'net, and skip imported content for now... It would even be a good thing, as BBC programmes are a cut above the rest.
He was referring to industrial espionage, not literature. Where do you think turn-of-the-century American cars got their technology from (later to outsell British and German models in those countries)?
Math has a habit of turning up in virtually every rigorous discipline you can think of, in some form or other. In addition, the formal, organized, logical, channeled creativity it instils in its students is of inestimable value, even if you never touch a formal discipline in your life. In many ways, this can be said for some classical studies, like Latin and Greek grammar, which were popular until the early 20th century. The only problem; the reason for what I say becoming increasingly less valid, is that the way math is taught and graded in elementary, highschool, and college, will not succeed in teaching anyone to think. In the U.S., mathematical education has lost its value to all but college math majors and math grad students. Sadly, this is more a reflection on our society than on the value of math.
"Real" is subjective, but if you mean the modern world, that could be put at around 150-180 years at least, starting with the Industrial Revolution and the moving of power away from the aristocracy, such as in 1776 and 1832. Modern society fundamentally dates from the 1830-1860s period (or the 1940-1960 period if you want to define it more narrowly).
Slashdot Mirror
I advise teaching drama instead of history. ;)
Natural rights and human rights began during the English Enlightenment of the 18th century, spurred by the English Bill of Rights of 1689, and expanded on by philosophers such as Hobbes, Locke etc. Jefferson and Franklin and Paine had widely read the English, French and Scottish philosophers of the Enlightenment, and pulled together the Declaration and the Constitution mostly from their common-law heritage and Enlightenment philosophers. Portraying them as creating the wave rather than riding it is misleading.
What reason could you possibly have for trying to prevent in-flight modification of a video file you are distributing and making available constantly to millions of users? I mean, other than pure bureaucratic or incompetent waste?
The Victorian era was exceptional. The rate of progress seen then has not been matched before then or since.
You're right, although you should ignore the last Bond movie to complete your analogy -- a nice, gritty, back to the roots type reboot of the series. Whereas Windows seems to be showing quite the opposite development with Vista.
Elinks (don't know about links) does support iframes. The support is actually very neatly and intuitively done, if you are used to vim windows. They don't implement CSS though.
The Goodies, although funnier than Python, were sadly strangled by BBC2's controller, Jane Root, who refused to repeat them or release them. Thus, they were never syndicated to the U.S. on a large scale, nor did they see more than 5 or 6 episodes released out of some 94... It's a real shame.
Well, according to many historians, the country worst off was France. ;) I'll leave frog jokes to others... otherwise, good analogy.
No, that is incorrect. The Crown has a specific meaning, it refers to the functions of the head of state and is largely a distinct term from the government. When you want to refer to the government (as in this case), you would use "HMG" or "the government". Using "the Crown" is simply incorrect. I'm sorry, but anyone who moderated my post above as Troll simply does not understand the (admittedly subtle) difference. By the way, I'm not British.
What on Earth has this got to do with the Crown? Are you just an American highschooler who hasn't gotten past the War of Independence in your history classes?
You're trolling. The figures are taken from news.bbc.co.uk, which is perfectly Linux-friendly. I use that site every day, accessing it from Mozilla Firefox on Linux, ELinks on Linux, lynx on Linux (the lo-fi version), Snownews (the RSS feed) on Linux. I play the videos using the Flash plugin which took a click to install on my 32-bit system with Firefox, and I listen to the audio news using the Helix Player (Real) or mplayer from the command-line, again both on Linux. The BBC News website and various other sites such as H2G2 or BBC Comedy are extraordinarily Linux-friendly (because they are standards-based and accessible). The iPlayer seems to be the only Linux-unfriendly portion of their site, but again, that is not where the statistics come from.
The BBC's coverage of the story is as usual far less sensational and more informative: "The pictures had been manipulated to disguise the man's face with a swirl pattern, but computer specialists at Germany's federal police agency, the BKA, worked with Interpol's human trafficking team to produce identifiable images.". The other news (that story is from yesterday) is that there have already been quite a few reported sightings, although naturally most are probably just overreactions.
This is (yet another) good reason for not basing one's actions, beliefs and decisions on emotion, but rather on reason. I myself am religious, but from a pragmatic starting point, i.e. I do not base my beliefs on feeling, but on what I classify as evidence. Before you ask, yes, I have a good grasp of statistics and human behaviour, but believe in a God nevertheless.
Auction the privilege to the public. ;)
Thanks for clarifying your position on the free market.
Still, that doesn't change the fact that excluding monopolies is not against the definition of a free market. The free market simply dictates that prices are arranged by the mutual consent of the traders, based on the laws of supply and demand. For any good or service in which the law of supply and demand means that an item which can be supplied by only one entity is in demand, you have a natural monopoly. Admittedly this doesn't apply to software, so I agree that Microsoft has subverted the software free market. However, in general for free markets, there is nothing that goes against monopolies.
Oho, that's just where you're wrong. Yes, it is. A free market even encourages monopolies, which must be dealt with by governments with monopoly laws, and enforced case-by-case with lawsuits. A free market with a monopoly in it is not a very good market. But it is a free market nonetheless. You're committing the "No True Scotsman" fallacy in thus praising the free market.
Precisely: because you've gotten to know the right set, not for any reasons of academic quality. Not that this has ever been any different in the US or most other countries of the world. The aristocracy tend to hang together; in the US the aristocrat kids do it in the Ivy League. It's jus money-based rather than title-based aristocracy these days.
He didn't say fashion, he said (admittedly imprecise) "nice apparel". Society's average everyday dress style changes extremely slowly. Take neckwear. A modern tie is tied in much the same fashion as it was in the 1880s (although the collar has changed), and waistcoats date to the 17th century. A person's everyday dress is unlikely to change over their lifetime, so clothing standards are perpetuated. If you dress today like people usually dressed in the 1930s (not in films or on events: in the everydays), you won't be too much out of place, although it might be old-fashioned. If you dress today like people in the everydays did in the 1950s or 1960s, you won't be out of place at all. To be brief, dressing (in the sense of total appearance) conventionally is cheap, easy and stable. It only requires a modicum more effort than dressing with corporate freebies. It is usually just marginally more expensive, and usually even cheaper if you don't mind thrift stores or straight razors (which I certainly don't). I've bought every tie I own for one dollar at thrift stores, my shirts are inherited, and I shave with a bar of soap replaced every 4-6 months and a $5 straight razor. I generally look perfectly conventional in Europe (where I am from), and slightly toff on the U.S. West Coast, but I don't mind that, as it helps a great deal with hiring. ;)
Mis-parse. Illegal (music or software) downloads.
From the credit card application: "In order to use our Financial Services credit applications, you will need to have a browser that supports Javascript and standard 128 Bit SSL encryption such as Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 or higher, or AOL 8.0 or higher." Mildly ironic.
It only took about 200 years, quite literally... It also depends on where you draw the line with horse taming. Horses were the major form of transport before the industrial revolution, but that isn't to say that huge advances in metallurgy, etc. had not occurred. Just pointing this out as many people underestimate the magnitude of the change the Victorian era brought.
They could opt to just release BBC content (that they own the copryights to) on the 'net, and skip imported content for now... It would even be a good thing, as BBC programmes are a cut above the rest.
And Lotus and Triumph. Mazda Miata, anyone? Lotus Elan, Triumph TR-70, etc. ad nauseam.
He was referring to industrial espionage, not literature. Where do you think turn-of-the-century American cars got their technology from (later to outsell British and German models in those countries)?
Math has a habit of turning up in virtually every rigorous discipline you can think of, in some form or other. In addition, the formal, organized, logical, channeled creativity it instils in its students is of inestimable value, even if you never touch a formal discipline in your life. In many ways, this can be said for some classical studies, like Latin and Greek grammar, which were popular until the early 20th century. The only problem; the reason for what I say becoming increasingly less valid, is that the way math is taught and graded in elementary, highschool, and college, will not succeed in teaching anyone to think. In the U.S., mathematical education has lost its value to all but college math majors and math grad students. Sadly, this is more a reflection on our society than on the value of math.
"Real" is subjective, but if you mean the modern world, that could be put at around 150-180 years at least, starting with the Industrial Revolution and the moving of power away from the aristocracy, such as in 1776 and 1832. Modern society fundamentally dates from the 1830-1860s period (or the 1940-1960 period if you want to define it more narrowly).