i can't believe anyone here is actually getting up in arms about this.:)
zd is just baiting us, afterall. whether they are just trying to get more banner ads out, or they just printed it out of spite, i don't know. but c'mon...if people were really snubbing macmillan then why are they the best selling "distribution?"
they don't get any press because they are just the publisher. how often do people swoon over Bantam publishing because a new paperback has come out? rarely...the attention goes to the author, in general.
get with it, folks...zd is pulling our chains, there's no reason for us to attach that chain to our new, shiny nose rings.:)
while i'm dubious that cyberterrorism itself could lead to a massive loss of life, it would make one fine distraction for a CBRN attack.
it wouldn't even take an attack on financial/government servers...the trucking industry, for instance, is every bit as important to everyday workings of the country as being able to use the atm. how much of a distraction was it when that satellite (whose name just dissolved from my pitiful excuse of a memory) went down?
for that matter, i wouldn't imagine it would be difficult redirect any shipment enroute if the company uses satellites to track shipments/inform drivers. "hey joe, those bins of auto parts we picked up don't go to the saturn factory, we're taking them to a warehouse in downtown Nashville now."
actually, it should be a pretty good test. if it comes out hairy, and grows to be 1.5 the size of a modern elephant, then there won't be much doubt about whether it worked or not.
the similarities between the elephant/mammoth should benefit the young mammoth, i would think, but shouldn't contaminate the young'n enough to raise much question about whether or not the experiment worked...scientists and journalists will just have to turn to other aspects of the experiment to flame each other over.
was eric elected to a position of authority, or did people just start listening/following along when he spoke his mind?
the best leaders seem to be those that follow their own paths and ideals, rather than bow to political correctness (a newish buzzword, i know, but i couldn't think of a better way to put it.) perhaps i should define the word 'best.' by 'best' i mean the most effective at getting the point across, following through on those ideas, and supporting those who support them. plenty of people are great at bullshitting people into following them or giving them money, but these aren't people i'd consider the 'best.'
i always thought that the point of democracy was that the people had the right to choose for themselves...including the leaders. no one twists anyone's arm to listen to esr. feel free to disagree with him! do it loudly! more power to the whole system!!
just don't expect those people who come to the fore because they are outspoken to shut up once they are there.
for what it's worth, the fcc is in the middle of restructering itself, which i imagine is probably where _some_ of this sluggishness is coming from.
however, as i recall, the restructering is supposed to demphasize government regulation to allow market forces a bit more leeway to regulate themselves.
at the same time, the fcc is starting to turn it's eye back to enforcing regulations on the ham bands, among other things.
i suppose what i'm driving at is that the fcc seems to be trying to reprioritize, and figure out just what in the hell they ought to be doing. not to be an apologist, but i wonder if the fcc has been taken aback by all this as the public has.
assuming that the author means free as in speech, and sun would GPL/insertappropriatelicensehere, i rather think the outcome would be quite the opposite.
while i'm sure there'd be a number of folks running Linux/BSD that would switch production boxes over to Solaris initially, i don't think anything will wipe Linux off of people's desktops (until Something Better (TM) comes along. too many people enjoy tinkering with it. too many people have sent too many keyboards to the dump over it.
after an initial hit, i think that linux developers would pillage the Solaris source code, and end up leaving Sun in the dust after a year or two. there is alot in there which linux could use, but the about the only thing Sun has to gain from linux is a user base. how many active linux developers would switch immediately? not many, i'd wager. politics, if nothing else, would keep them where they are.
is it legal for government agencies to own businesses, even non-profits? i was under the impression (probably from my high school years) that it wasn't.
i'm aware of government subsidies, legislated/regulated monopolies, and the like...but isn't this where the line is crossed between support, and ownership?
don't forget all those taxes that are passed along to consumers by the manufacturers, farmers/timber/mining,oil, resellers, etc. on down the line. we get to pay those too, eventually.
>Every so often something comes up to remind us that we are not so superior after all.
i may steal that as a.sig.:)
while i agree with you for the most part, i'm not at all certain that these 'facts' make any of the long hours of discussion here any less relevant.
they were kids mad at the world. i didn't see anything that suggested the kids weren't geeks, simply that the goth/trenchcoat/gay themes were nonsense.
i don't believe that i've ever met anyone who spent much time planning mass destruction who wasn't a geek of some sort. this, of course, doesn't mean that i've met everyone who has thought of such a thing...but in general, i think we're the ones who spend so much time obsessing (my personal favorite version..."thinking too much,") that we'd actually work out plans, and either invent or copy the tools necessary for the job.
the fact that they weren't neo-nazi's, the gay liberation front, or dancing elephants only makes it more relevant to me.
hope i don't seem argumentative here, because i think you have an interesting (and enlightened) perspective. i'm just not sure how it changes things for the hundreds (thousands?) of people here who either related to the killers or to the people who've suffered long after the shootings.
while i can understand why you are sick of hearing about this, you might actually want to read this article.
it isn't a piece about why anyone killed anyone, rather a clarification about what _didn't_ occur. something nice to pass along to all those concerned parents trying to brainwash the children "for the children."
i do wonder if there's any more honesty in this article than anything else the put out in the media. i don't read salon enough to know whether or not they are a source for unbiased news, or if they are simply another propoganda machine. *shrug* in the end, i suppose it doesn't make any difference.
i'm sure i would not have heard about this article if it hadn't been posted here, so i suppose someone around here oughta say thanks to roblimo for it. i won't say that i've been exactly thrilled with/.'s quality of late, and i'm not looking for another three months of columbine articles, but this one was worth it.
well, you could always use the old fashioned ballot box method.:)
of course, as an experiment, you might set up some kind of trial internet vote, as well...when students stop by to vote, encourage them to help you with the experiment. the electronic vote wouldn't mean anything, but it would give you something of a comparison to traditional balloting.
Slashdot Mirror
oops, better make that bippy.
perhaps they could even get Lemmy to be their spokesman.
:)
a little bit of 'Speedfreak,' and you could bet your sweet biffy i'd con my wife into letting buy one.
oh shoot...being a truck driver i'd forgotten about this. :)
/.
:)
no wonder zd is baiting everyone here at
techie day joke, perhaps.
one partial solution to this would be to put in big bold letters:
Released: 8/1/99
or whatever...at least that way when people are looking at red hat 5.1 (and yes, i saw it on the shelf last week) they'll know they're being scammed.
i can't believe anyone here is actually getting up in arms about this. :)
:)
zd is just baiting us, afterall. whether they are just trying to get more banner ads out, or they just printed it out of spite, i don't know. but c'mon...if people were really snubbing macmillan then why are they the best selling "distribution?"
they don't get any press because they are just the publisher. how often do people swoon over Bantam publishing because a new paperback has come out? rarely...the attention goes to the author, in general.
get with it, folks...zd is pulling our chains, there's no reason for us to attach that chain to our new, shiny nose rings.
robin,
/.
;)
i'm curious, how'd he find this place? i'm well aware it's not secret, just curious why he chose
maybe you can get him some week for the Q&A session.
while i'm dubious that cyberterrorism itself could lead to a massive loss of life, it would make one fine distraction for a CBRN attack.
it wouldn't even take an attack on financial/government servers...the trucking industry, for instance, is every bit as important to everyday workings of the country as being able to use the atm. how much of a distraction was it when that satellite (whose name just dissolved from my pitiful excuse of a memory) went down?
for that matter, i wouldn't imagine it would be difficult redirect any shipment enroute if the company uses satellites to track shipments/inform drivers. "hey joe, those bins of auto parts we picked up don't go to the saturn factory, we're taking them to a warehouse in downtown Nashville now."
cause confused elephants are dangerous elephants?
:)
actually, it should be a pretty good test. if it comes out hairy, and grows to be 1.5 the size of a modern elephant, then there won't be much doubt about whether it worked or not.
the similarities between the elephant/mammoth should benefit the young mammoth, i would think, but shouldn't contaminate the young'n enough to raise much question about whether or not the experiment worked...scientists and journalists will just have to turn to other aspects of the experiment to flame each other over.
but it wasn't off topic, either. again, it points back directly to esr's answers.
since when did having disdain for something disqualify it from conversation, anyway?
so, when will o'reilly be publishing the rest of your history of free software (or software, for that matter?) :)
whether you'd thought of it or not, you've definately the aptitude to do it...and i, for one, would read it.
was eric elected to a position of authority, or did people just start listening/following along when he spoke his mind?
the best leaders seem to be those that follow their own paths and ideals, rather than bow to political correctness (a newish buzzword, i know, but i couldn't think of a better way to put it.) perhaps i should define the word 'best.' by 'best' i mean the most effective at getting the point across, following through on those ideas, and supporting those who support them. plenty of people are great at bullshitting people into following them or giving them money, but these aren't people i'd consider the 'best.'
i always thought that the point of democracy was that the people had the right to choose for themselves...including the leaders. no one twists anyone's arm to listen to esr. feel free to disagree with him! do it loudly! more power to the whole system!!
just don't expect those people who come to the fore because they are outspoken to shut up once they are there.
for what it's worth, the fcc is in the middle of restructering itself, which i imagine is probably where _some_ of this sluggishness is coming from.
however, as i recall, the restructering is supposed to demphasize government regulation to allow market forces a bit more leeway to regulate themselves.
at the same time, the fcc is starting to turn it's eye back to enforcing regulations on the ham bands, among other things.
i suppose what i'm driving at is that the fcc seems to be trying to reprioritize, and figure out just what in the hell they ought to be doing. not to be an apologist, but i wonder if the fcc has been taken aback by all this as the public has.
assuming that the author means free as in speech, and sun would GPL/insertappropriatelicensehere, i rather think the outcome would be quite the opposite.
while i'm sure there'd be a number of folks running Linux/BSD that would switch production boxes over to Solaris initially, i don't think anything will wipe Linux off of people's desktops (until Something Better (TM) comes along. too many people enjoy tinkering with it. too many people have sent too many keyboards to the dump over it.
after an initial hit, i think that linux developers would pillage the Solaris source code, and end up leaving Sun in the dust after a year or two. there is alot in there which linux could use, but the about the only thing Sun has to gain from linux is a user base. how many active linux developers would switch immediately? not many, i'd wager. politics, if nothing else, would keep them where they are.
is it legal for government agencies to own businesses, even non-profits? i was under the impression (probably from my high school years) that it wasn't.
i'm aware of government subsidies, legislated/regulated monopolies, and the like...but isn't this where the line is crossed between support, and ownership?
a treaty has never really stopped anyone from doing anything. getting caught? well, that's another kettle of fish.
hrm. not sure why the above was moderated to flamebait.....at any rate, it looks like there will be freebsd 3.2 on x86 and on alpha up shortly.
don't forget all those taxes that are passed along to consumers by the manufacturers, farmers/timber/mining,oil, resellers, etc. on down the line. we get to pay those too, eventually.
well, i daresay that the religious right would need to become a bit more polite as well...*grin*
I bet Richard Hoagland is going to love this.
>Every so often something comes up to remind us that we are not so superior after all.
.sig. :)
i may steal that as a
while i agree with you for the most part, i'm not at all certain that these 'facts' make any of the long hours of discussion here any less relevant.
they were kids mad at the world. i didn't see anything that suggested the kids weren't geeks, simply that the goth/trenchcoat/gay themes were nonsense.
i don't believe that i've ever met anyone who spent much time planning mass destruction who wasn't a geek of some sort. this, of course, doesn't mean that i've met everyone who has thought of such a thing...but in general, i think we're the ones who spend so much time obsessing (my personal favorite version..."thinking too much,") that we'd actually work out plans, and either invent or copy the tools necessary for the job.
the fact that they weren't neo-nazi's, the gay liberation front, or dancing elephants only makes it more relevant to me.
hope i don't seem argumentative here, because i think you have an interesting (and enlightened) perspective. i'm just not sure how it changes things for the hundreds (thousands?) of people here who either related to the killers or to the people who've suffered long after the shootings.
while i can understand why you are sick of hearing about this, you might actually want to read this article.
/.'s quality of late, and i'm not looking for another three months of columbine articles, but this one was worth it.
it isn't a piece about why anyone killed anyone, rather a clarification about what _didn't_ occur. something nice to pass along to all those concerned parents trying to brainwash the children "for the children."
i do wonder if there's any more honesty in this article than anything else the put out in the media. i don't read salon enough to know whether or not they are a source for unbiased news, or if they are simply another propoganda machine. *shrug* in the end, i suppose it doesn't make any difference.
i'm sure i would not have heard about this article if it hadn't been posted here, so i suppose someone around here oughta say thanks to roblimo for it. i won't say that i've been exactly thrilled with
i rather agree with Robert Heinlein on this...if everyone in the country were armed, this would be the politest damned society you ever did see.
Rob, pay attention...
This is a damned fine idea. Wish I'd thought of it.
well, you could always use the old fashioned ballot box method. :)
of course, as an experiment, you might set up some kind of trial internet vote, as well...when students stop by to vote, encourage them to help you with the experiment. the electronic vote wouldn't mean anything, but it would give you something of a comparison to traditional balloting.