That most people use Windows? Nope, the facts contradict you.
That most computer support people are Windows support people? Nope, the facts contradict you.
Therefore, the caricature is of a Windows support person. Whether you want to accept that fact or not.
The caricature is of a jackass who decides that he has the right to mock people because he has a skill they don't. This is made worse in a lot of the sketches with the choice for the user being either "figure it out yourself" or "MOVE!" and having him do the whole thing.
Nick Burns isn't supporting their Linux boxes. He's supporting their Windows boxes."
Well, first off for a lot of the sketches he was doing Mac support =), however the reason I refer to the statement as inaccurate is that the caricature is of the computer support guy in GENERAL, not just for one OS. Yes, most people use windows, that is not what I was disputing. The dispute is with your "therefore". Just because most people use windows it does not logically follow that the caricature is of a windows support person. It might be more likely than it being a windows support person, but it doesn't make it a windows support person. Fine though, let it be a windows support guy. I don't think a lot of Linux folks who claim to want to help new people are much better. Nick Burns is funny to people because they have similar experiences with all sorts of technical support personnel. He is the GENERIC IT support guy caricature, whether that is a support guy for a network going to end user's offices to see if a switch isn't behaving, a support guy for Windows, a support guy for Linux, a support guy for Mac, or even for corporate phones. Average users simply see it as "that guy who lords it over me that he knows more about this than me and makes me feel like a dumbshit to the point where I can't even ask a question without being wrong from the start" and that's the important part here. A person like Nick Burns would treat those folks the same if they were on Windows or Linux, he would just mock them about something Linux related instead of Mac or Windows related.
"trolls complain about Linux simply because it is different from Windows and they don't want to re-learn their "computer skills". But the reality is that they don't have "computer skills". All they have is "Windows Skills"". Ok, so people have to learn new skills to learn new OSes. Do people complain about OSX because it is different from Windows? People, as a rule, don't like windows. However, they view their options as "go to a mac and lose compatibility with almost everything along with breaking the bank or go to linux and get told what a dumbass I am when I ask questions the wrong way or don't know something that's considered common knowledge. Eh, I'll stay with windows".
Yes, your comment about the Ubuntu channel is entirely correct, I have gotten no end of help in the ubuntu/kubuntu channels. I would posit, however, that you and I have "learned" how to ask questions, odd that it's a skill.
I think the question of whether Linux will become a serious desktop contender has more to do with the people behind it than the software. Stop thinking about whether its free or not (as in speech or beer or whatever else) and think about how people are seeing it. The question is who the OS is "for". I happen to think that most people don't have the time or the inclination to learn everything needed about computers and the related technology to "switch to linux and stay there" as it is now. They're doing other things for the world. Aren't the ideas behind FOSS that user-friendly doesn't have to mean bogged down or crappy, to provide software free of charge and open source that you don't have to be a "computer person" to use? Or are we just another little treefort with our own initiation ceremonies talking about how stupid people are? I think anyone on this planet could learn to use a linux distribution. I think anyone on this planet could learn to u
Well, the free support I was referring to was the IRC channels and Forums. I probably didn't make it clear but I was saying that the people who do venture into IRC channels and forums for the first time looking for help usually get informed fairly quickly that they should stfu and figure it out themselves. That's a surefire way to scare off people who could otherwise be great examples of how linux can work for anyone who tries. Note that difference. What is said about linux is "it works for anyone who will try", what that really means is the old joke of "linux is only free if your time is worthless". The majority of my post was not about phone support, it was about the very negative sides of the culture. "Very few people will even try linux". Yes and that is why we should try to retain those people, instead of basically saying "are you good enough/smart enough to use this OS?". "Or they want something to complain about to show how superior they are to the geeks who prefer Linux." I'm unclear what you mean by that. If you're referring to people complaining about things not working in Linux and then acting like they've just "shown them", maybe it's because the hype makes Linux out to be the second coming of Christ? "Most of the computer users are using Windows. Therefore, that caricature is about a Windows support person and Windows users." I'm sorry I find this to be inaccurate. The caricature is of a jackass who decides that he has the right to mock people because he has a skill they don't. This is made worse in a lot of the sketches with the choice for the user being either "figure it out yourself" or "MOVE!" and having him do the whole thing. The caricature is OS-independent. You could have a Nick Burns in Windows, Linux, OSX or in your refrigerator repairman. The key part of it is "Jackass Who Decides That You Are An Idiot For Not Having The Same Expertise He Does"
There's that old saying "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar". When most people think of Linux...well...most people to be perfectly honest don't know what it is, and more importantly, they don't care. Most who have heard of Linux have the impression that it's kind of like a treefort for the geeks who still havn't outgrown their victim complexes. Now while I don't think this is true for the majority of Linux users (after I waded through and became more accustomed to the culture), it is simple to see how a vast majority of users would not want to be anywhere near a culture so hostile. Most people are accustomed to being able to call a number, wait on hold for an hour or so, and then slowly work through their problem with a technician, some of whom are more polite and or better at communicating than others. Getting help for their problem with a technology does not involve having to learn a new technology (IRC, Froums, etc. And yes forums can be new to people). It involves picking up a phone and dialing a number. For those who have read Neal Stephenson's "in the beginning there was the command line", you will recall the analogy of the vehicle dealerships. Remember how he described Linux as a tank with people who were building them for free and yelling "if it doesn't work we'll come fix it for free! while you sleep!" to which the response from the prospective buyer was "stay away from my house you freak!"?. That's not really the case anymore. The tanks are still free, but the "free support" if you will, lives in a system of caves and revile the surface dwellers; insulting them for asking questions unless they do the secret handshake first. Now obviously not all, not even a majority of linux people are going to do that to new folks, but enough do that we have the unfortunate reputation to most folks of being the caricature of the jackass IT guy best described in the "Nick Burns, your company's Computer Guy" sketches on Saturday Night Live. One of the responses to this is "well I learned this the hard way! I read all of these man pages and read all of these forums and spent a year learning to code!". Congratulations, that is a great accomplishment, and no one is trying to lessen it. Those methods might not work for everyone, or even most people who are trying to learn. I, for one, found the man pages to be horribly inaccessible. Most of them don't even have examples. Time to open the treefort, people learn a lot better when you're nice to them.
I would like to bring up a specific set of parents which would be absolutely hellish with this kind of tech. Evangelicals. I grew up with one of my parents being evangelical and the other not really wanting to argue with her. There is a particular oddity with this type of fundie. Unlike many other types of fundies, they believe that a big company's technology is never wrong. This is the same type of person who quotes some marketing gab and then when questioned says something equivelent to "I think they know better than you do". The same kind of person who warns someone to not fix say...a pair of glasses for chrissakes because one isn't "certified". Now merge that with the fundamentalist mindset. "Dr. James Dobson said young men being around women makes them crazed for sex and that they give birth to demon children! You are forbidden from seeing these harlots!" Now...do we really want this kind of person to have this type of tech? And before a rebuttal is made of "they're too stupid to learn tech". No, they are not. Evangelicals and other fundies will learn it if it is to keep their widdle children "Safe", whether physically or safe morally however they define that.
This completely outweighs the benefits of this technology. To repeat what was said above. Shitty and insane parents happen more than kidnappings.
I wasn't around in what could be considered the golden age, so I can't make any sort of authoritive or even realistic comment about the relative health of the net because I never saw it in what is held as its prime. Perhaps that is part of the problem. An entire generation of people are growing up interacting with the internet as if it was simply an appliance or a service much the same way power is a service. The interactivity is lost on a great number of people so they have no problem thinking of it as just another appliance. The idea of ownership becomes important./. folk tend to think of the internet as...well...ours. Not in the sense of our property per se, because that seems like an absurd notion, but more of a heritage that anyone can take part in. We take care of it because of this, if a core concept (such as a protocol being made somehow "illegal", or Net Neutrality Being Under Fire) comes into view, we jump to defend it like a bear defending its cubs. Yes this vigilence often makes us look like complete and utter wackjobs, but a lot of people would consider the bear to be overzealous as well. What the telcos/ISPs are trying to do is make people think that the cables, the routers and the servers are "the internet". This is bullshit. While "The Internet" would not be what it is without the infrastructure, it would also be bland and dead without its users, without the innovation driven by the people who just want to make something nifty and see if it works. (YouTube...Google...Slashdot...Digg...Webcomics... hell Instant Messaging was a project by some MIT students basically for the hell of it to make collaboration easier on projects...um....LINUX). ISPs, whether they realize it or not, are only around to deliver this content. If they kill off the natural innovation in people, and I would argue that most people are just too run down to innovate like they're able to and wish to, then they are choking themselves. If it comes down to it, the internet is a technology. The ability to network networks is an ability and an understanding, not a bunch of copper, fiber and metal. If it was neccessary, a new one could be made. Yes this sounds ludicrous, no I am not just thinking "oh, we can build a new interwebs!". The first network was also modest, with fewer than 15 nodes if I remember. The collection of networks we have now forming the internet is only formidable because of the amount of money put into it. Routers, servers and cabling cost an absolute ton of money. Would you rather have a very high speed link to the same bland useless content on almost every page (with small differences inserted to keep people thinking they hold various "points of view") and services that used to be offered for free that are now A) crippled and B) pricey, or a slower connection (perhaps much slower) where there is intelligent conversation and debate, a greater degree of freedom for information, and the ownership of that network to either be a monolithic ogre or a number of absurd little fiefdoms? I choose the latter, I don't care if I have to use a 14.4K Modem. (hell...we can compress porn...right?...)
I've been wondering about alternatives as well. It seems all the English speaking nations are on the way to being police states. What's the scoop on Switzerland? Are there any swiss folk here who could give us some insight?
This is such a useless, broad and void statement. What this basically translates to is "disagrees with my moral beliefs" (usually which wedge issues) which, by the way, is meaningless. You'd even have trouble getting people to agree on what traditional american values are. Mom and Applepie? Freedom/Liberty/American Way (tm)? Loving Jesus, pickup trucks and hating queers? Civil Disobedience? Entrepenuership?
You could get all these varied responses (to name a few) So your "traditional american values" bullshit just serves as a very broad attack with no real basis. Please check your idiocy at the gate when entering/.
please do tell, where is this place? I can't think of anywhere not either on its own path to horror or that is not imminently threatened by the states.
The proper punishment for treason against a country and its foundations, for everything that makes it anything of value, is death, in plain view, so that we can know the bastards are truely dead. Those we revere for initiating violence to throw off a corrupt an cruel government had the names of Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Madison and Franklin (among others) What names will be remembered 200 years from now when children read about the second revolutionary war?
God I remember high school....blech. I mean, I went a fairly decent one in Chicago, public yes. Gah...I still felt like I was in a prison and I was in one of the nicest ones around. Nothing against my high school in particular, it's just the way they're run, like factories where you had better line up and do what you're told; and if you step out of line, you'll get slammed.
This country stopped being what it was a long time ago. It has become a sham. We all just have it in the back of our minds "that's how it is". We accept the corruption, idiocy and incompetence because we're used to it. This shit needs to stop, the buck passing, the lies, the outright flaunted decadence and waste.
I don't believe in capital punishment, except for an exceptional set. I believe in the death penalty for any government employee who works to subvert/attack/damage the constitution/ourRights/democratic processes. In that case I believe it should be the default. Fine, I'm a radical, whatever. The fact is, such people hold the lives and rights of others in their hands, they have more responsibility. The penalty for corruption and treason, yes TREASON, should be death. Treason is thrown around by all the political camps like water, "it's treasonous!" they'll yell. No, high treason is betraying one's country, NOT ONE'S GOVERNMENT. When a politician sells out the people or the country, they are high traitors, and I'd like to see them put to death in PUBLIC. Public for cruelty? Public to incite fear? No, hardly, public for the same reason the bodies of Saddam Hussein's sons were put on display. To prove to the people "YES THEY ARE REALLY DEAD". In such a time, and particularly with these dealmaking weasels, it might be neccessary.
Fuck Hunting; This is why I'm a second ammendment supporter.
This just goes to show that there are a great number of things that should not be computerized/network connected etc. Just as one should not have an internet accessible refrigerator "mom! someone hacked the fridge again and turned the cooling off! Oh god the smell!!" One should not have electronic voting machines. Seriously, why the hell do we need electronic voting other than that a great deal of people were, excuse my honesty, too goddamn stupid to understand how to use a paper ballot. Another case of the ignorant masses rising up, bitching about how things are "too hard" and overcoming those of us who can follow simply printed instructions with their sheer moronic numbers. Fellow/.ers (particularly those of us in the states). Do you ever feel like you're strapped to a chair with a wet towel over your head surrounded by people who can't tie their own shoes without managing to injure themselves?
Is it still too early in the "OMG WE'RE FUCKED" process to just start shooting these bastards in the throat? Or are we going to wait around and twiddle our thumbs for a while yet?
Everyone declaring so much of this "sick" "disgusting" etc etc. Please stfu. Are people being harmed against their will in such images/videos? Any reputable studio has documentation on file showing this not to be the case. The performers are doing these things without being coerced (a lot are even into it! imagine that). How long ago was it that people would refer to homosexuality as "sick, disgusting" et al? If I was to start saying those sorts of things I would get modded into oblivion so fast my head would spin. There is an extremely broad range of what people refer to as "violent pornography" Is violent pornography rough sex? bdsm related things? simulated forced? no one can answer can they? Why? Because it's all so incredibly vague, and it's intended to be that way. The more vague the description is the more the folks enforcing it can cite things like snuff films (without noting of course that posession of snuff porn and the sites serving it are ALREADY illegal because they involve an actual MURDER) whilst shutting down sites that people who happen to be a little kinked like, sites that are harming no one. This is pure idiocy, and a move by the morality gestapo to push, more and more, "deviants" out to the edge. Isn't anyone the least bit bothered that this is basically another "mothers against $HORRIBLEVILTHINGTHATWILLSURELYDESTROYSOCIETY" group? It gets to where I think the US and UK are in a race to see who can come up with the most rediculous legislation the quickest.
You're a flaming idiot. You're going to forbid basic acts of commerce with what the kids have? Why don't you forbid them from trading anything at all? Oh, and I really want to know how the hell you plan to enforce such an asinine ban. Are we going to link individual pieces of food to each child via some sort of electronic sensor? And don't say that I'm somehow hyperbolising things, becuase other than having a teacher/adult watching over every child in that lunch room (which is pretty much just as bad) that's what would be neccessary. Also, yes the school DOES exist to bring forth the ideological libertarian start in kids. It should teach them to critically think and be rational which leads to (SURPIRSE!!) libertarianism (to some degree anyway). You do realize that schools teach more than the hard sciences (math, physics etc as you listed them)...right? There are government classes...language...literature. I'm sorry but this is one of the dumber posts I've ever read on slashdot. And that's saying something. Please either think, or don't post.
To hasten the day, spread the word, keep up the hope and try to show people the problems, the inconsistencies, the bullshit.
If it doesn't happen? Learn to survive in the rough. Learn how to use weapons, small arms and otherwise. Get on friendly terms with farmers/ food sources. The currencies will be food/fuel/medical supplies. Learn basic first aid/little more advanced stuff. Realize and accept that it will take a literal revolution and war to take back this land. Win that gorram war
Yes, the president is not/supposed/ to do a lot of things. He does them anyway. Congress is not/supposed/ to do a lot of things, they do them anyway. (repeat ad nauseam for judicial, various agencies). They do it anyway of course. Because who's going to stop them? The citizens? Bah! they say. "The citizens are no threat! We have them quaking in their boots about an unlikely threat that is, in reality, less dangerous than car accidents or accidents in the home. They work for us, they are ours" The government has forgotten who they are working for. Perhaps several hundred thousand (or existence help me, a million) citizens armed to the teeth in DC would get the message across? I'm not sure how else to put this. We fear them. There are people I know; bright, educated, rational people, who are actually afraid of the government coming and ruining their lives for no good reason. Some worry about it happening irrationally, others worry very, very rationally. What does it say about a country when its best citizens are afraid of their government and literally believe they have no recourse? The idea that one can simply be "disappeared", that civil rights can be taken by executive authority, that things can be swept under the carpet by the two words "national security"...what does this say about our nation?... Consider the idea that what we currently have is the three branches of government granting each other (or sometimes themselves) powers that are either entirely unmentioned or forbidden by the constitution. There is a great quote from Firefly by Book that sums a lot of it up. "A Government is simply a body of men...usually ungoverned themselves". We need to come back and start governing our government. We need to fight back, literally. They used to be afraid of being voted out...they fixed that with a duopoly of Republicrats and Diebold voting machines. They were afraid of militias, uprisings, they fixed that by labling people terrorists who simply wanted to be armed and have a chance against tyranny that might arise (and it has) and by eroding the 2nd Ammendment. So then it came to people believing they really had no say in government, and having to be afraid of the wide powers of the government being used to ruin their personal lives and to have very little, if any, recourse. Now, what does it all come down to in the end? "Do what we say. Obey...or we will hurt you" Hurt. Gunshot, prison, torture, blunt trauma, psychological torment. That is the source of power of any government in the end. COERCION. What, in the end then, is the only true recourse against a government that refuses all other recourse? That which they cannot refuse. The people of the country, collectively, being much more heavily armed than they are. I think every member of our government should live in mortal fear of the taxpayers figuritively (and literally) killing them. Because come on, it takes a LOT to piss Americans off (which is also rather depressing to me. Where are the days where we would tar and feather British officials?) So the basic concept comes to, if you manage to violate enough of the rights of the American people, I firmly stand behind them killing you in your sleep, in a vicious and hopefully comical manner. (and I'm not even sure if there's a bit of joking in that statement). More and more it seems "fine, you're going to be above the law? Then we're going to be above the law for a moment to remove you". V was right, it is not the people that should be afraid of their government, but the government that should be afraid of its people. The mandatory things: Learn gun safety, Learn to shoot (accurately) (START WITH A.22!!) Learn to service/care for your weapon(s) Learn how to survive (as in downed pilot behind enemy lines survive) Learn about nutrition (seems like a joke until you consider how important it really is to know what's important enough to bring with you) Learn how your car/vehicle works, seriously. Learn
Slashdot Mirror
"What is inaccurate?
That most people use Windows? Nope, the facts contradict you.
That most computer support people are Windows support people? Nope, the facts contradict you.
Therefore, the caricature is of a Windows support person. Whether you want to accept that fact or not.
The caricature is of a jackass who decides that he has the right to mock people because he has a skill they don't. This is made worse in a lot of the sketches with the choice for the user being either "figure it out yourself" or "MOVE!" and having him do the whole thing.
Nick Burns isn't supporting their Linux boxes. He's supporting their Windows boxes."
Well, first off for a lot of the sketches he was doing Mac support =), however the reason I refer to the statement as inaccurate is that the caricature is of the computer support guy in GENERAL, not just for one OS. Yes, most people use windows, that is not what I was disputing. The dispute is with your "therefore". Just because most people use windows it does not logically follow that the caricature is of a windows support person. It might be more likely than it being a windows support person, but it doesn't make it a windows support person. Fine though, let it be a windows support guy. I don't think a lot of Linux folks who claim to want to help new people are much better.
Nick Burns is funny to people because they have similar experiences with all sorts of technical support personnel. He is the GENERIC IT support guy caricature, whether that is a support guy for a network going to end user's offices to see if a switch isn't behaving, a support guy for Windows, a support guy for Linux, a support guy for Mac, or even for corporate phones. Average users simply see it as "that guy who lords it over me that he knows more about this than me and makes me feel like a dumbshit to the point where I can't even ask a question without being wrong from the start" and that's the important part here. A person like Nick Burns would treat those folks the same if they were on Windows or Linux, he would just mock them about something Linux related instead of Mac or Windows related.
"trolls complain about Linux simply because it is different from Windows and they don't want to re-learn their "computer skills". But the reality is that they don't have "computer skills". All they have is "Windows Skills"".
Ok, so people have to learn new skills to learn new OSes. Do people complain about OSX because it is different from Windows? People, as a rule, don't like windows. However, they view their options as "go to a mac and lose compatibility with almost everything along with breaking the bank or go to linux and get told what a dumbass I am when I ask questions the wrong way or don't know something that's considered common knowledge. Eh, I'll stay with windows".
Yes, your comment about the Ubuntu channel is entirely correct, I have gotten no end of help in the ubuntu/kubuntu channels. I would posit, however, that you and I have "learned" how to ask questions, odd that it's a skill.
I think the question of whether Linux will become a serious desktop contender has more to do with the people behind it than the software. Stop thinking about whether its free or not (as in speech or beer or whatever else) and think about how people are seeing it. The question is who the OS is "for". I happen to think that most people don't have the time or the inclination to learn everything needed about computers and the related technology to "switch to linux and stay there" as it is now. They're doing other things for the world. Aren't the ideas behind FOSS that user-friendly doesn't have to mean bogged down or crappy, to provide software free of charge and open source that you don't have to be a "computer person" to use? Or are we just another little treefort with our own initiation ceremonies talking about how stupid people are? I think anyone on this planet could learn to use a linux distribution. I think anyone on this planet could learn to u
Well, the free support I was referring to was the IRC channels and Forums. I probably didn't make it clear but I was saying that the people who do venture into IRC channels and forums for the first time looking for help usually get informed fairly quickly that they should stfu and figure it out themselves. That's a surefire way to scare off people who could otherwise be great examples of how linux can work for anyone who tries. Note that difference. What is said about linux is "it works for anyone who will try", what that really means is the old joke of "linux is only free if your time is worthless". The majority of my post was not about phone support, it was about the very negative sides of the culture.
"Very few people will even try linux". Yes and that is why we should try to retain those people, instead of basically saying "are you good enough/smart enough to use this OS?".
"Or they want something to complain about to show how superior they are to the geeks who prefer Linux." I'm unclear what you mean by that. If you're referring to people complaining about things not working in Linux and then acting like they've just "shown them", maybe it's because the hype makes Linux out to be the second coming of Christ?
"Most of the computer users are using Windows. Therefore, that caricature is about a Windows support person and Windows users." I'm sorry I find this to be inaccurate. The caricature is of a jackass who decides that he has the right to mock people because he has a skill they don't. This is made worse in a lot of the sketches with the choice for the user being either "figure it out yourself" or "MOVE!" and having him do the whole thing. The caricature is OS-independent. You could have a Nick Burns in Windows, Linux, OSX or in your refrigerator repairman. The key part of it is "Jackass Who Decides That You Are An Idiot For Not Having The Same Expertise He Does"
There's that old saying "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar". When most people think of Linux...well...most people to be perfectly honest don't know what it is, and more importantly, they don't care. Most who have heard of Linux have the impression that it's kind of like a treefort for the geeks who still havn't outgrown their victim complexes. Now while I don't think this is true for the majority of Linux users (after I waded through and became more accustomed to the culture), it is simple to see how a vast majority of users would not want to be anywhere near a culture so hostile. Most people are accustomed to being able to call a number, wait on hold for an hour or so, and then slowly work through their problem with a technician, some of whom are more polite and or better at communicating than others. Getting help for their problem with a technology does not involve having to learn a new technology (IRC, Froums, etc. And yes forums can be new to people). It involves picking up a phone and dialing a number. For those who have read Neal Stephenson's "in the beginning there was the command line", you will recall the analogy of the vehicle dealerships. Remember how he described Linux as a tank with people who were building them for free and yelling "if it doesn't work we'll come fix it for free! while you sleep!" to which the response from the prospective buyer was "stay away from my house you freak!"?. That's not really the case anymore. The tanks are still free, but the "free support" if you will, lives in a system of caves and revile the surface dwellers; insulting them for asking questions unless they do the secret handshake first.
Now obviously not all, not even a majority of linux people are going to do that to new folks, but enough do that we have the unfortunate reputation to most folks of being the caricature of the jackass IT guy best described in the "Nick Burns, your company's Computer Guy" sketches on Saturday Night Live.
One of the responses to this is "well I learned this the hard way! I read all of these man pages and read all of these forums and spent a year learning to code!". Congratulations, that is a great accomplishment, and no one is trying to lessen it. Those methods might not work for everyone, or even most people who are trying to learn. I, for one, found the man pages to be horribly inaccessible. Most of them don't even have examples.
Time to open the treefort, people learn a lot better when you're nice to them.
MOD PARENT UP!!
Dammit I wish I had mod points right now...
An eloquent and imho accurate point
I would like to bring up a specific set of parents which would be absolutely hellish with this kind of tech.
Evangelicals.
I grew up with one of my parents being evangelical and the other not really wanting to argue with her.
There is a particular oddity with this type of fundie. Unlike many other types of fundies, they believe that a big company's technology is never wrong.
This is the same type of person who quotes some marketing gab and then when questioned says something equivelent to "I think they know better than you do".
The same kind of person who warns someone to not fix say...a pair of glasses for chrissakes because one isn't "certified".
Now merge that with the fundamentalist mindset.
"Dr. James Dobson said young men being around women makes them crazed for sex and that they give birth to demon children! You are forbidden from seeing these harlots!"
Now...do we really want this kind of person to have this type of tech? And before a rebuttal is made of "they're too stupid to learn tech". No, they are not. Evangelicals and other fundies will learn it if it is to keep their widdle children "Safe", whether physically or safe morally however they define that.
This completely outweighs the benefits of this technology. To repeat what was said above. Shitty and insane parents happen more than kidnappings.
I wasn't around in what could be considered the golden age, so I can't make any sort of authoritive or even realistic comment about the relative health of the net because I never saw it in what is held as its prime. Perhaps that is part of the problem. An entire generation of people are growing up interacting with the internet as if it was simply an appliance or a service much the same way power is a service. The interactivity is lost on a great number of people so they have no problem thinking of it as just another appliance. The idea of ownership becomes important. /. folk tend to think of the internet as...well...ours. Not in the sense of our property per se, because that seems like an absurd notion, but more of a heritage that anyone can take part in. We take care of it because of this, if a core concept (such as a protocol being made somehow "illegal", or Net Neutrality Being Under Fire) comes into view, we jump to defend it like a bear defending its cubs. Yes this vigilence often makes us look like complete and utter wackjobs, but a lot of people would consider the bear to be overzealous as well. What the telcos/ISPs are trying to do is make people think that the cables, the routers and the servers are "the internet". This is bullshit. While "The Internet" would not be what it is without the infrastructure, it would also be bland and dead without its users, without the innovation driven by the people who just want to make something nifty and see if it works. (YouTube...Google...Slashdot...Digg...Webcomics... hell Instant Messaging was a project by some MIT students basically for the hell of it to make collaboration easier on projects...um....LINUX). ISPs, whether they realize it or not, are only around to deliver this content. If they kill off the natural innovation in people, and I would argue that most people are just too run down to innovate like they're able to and wish to, then they are choking themselves.
If it comes down to it, the internet is a technology. The ability to network networks is an ability and an understanding, not a bunch of copper, fiber and metal. If it was neccessary, a new one could be made. Yes this sounds ludicrous, no I am not just thinking "oh, we can build a new interwebs!". The first network was also modest, with fewer than 15 nodes if I remember. The collection of networks we have now forming the internet is only formidable because of the amount of money put into it. Routers, servers and cabling cost an absolute ton of money. Would you rather have a very high speed link to the same bland useless content on almost every page (with small differences inserted to keep people thinking they hold various "points of view") and services that used to be offered for free that are now A) crippled and B) pricey, or a slower connection (perhaps much slower) where there is intelligent conversation and debate, a greater degree of freedom for information, and the ownership of that network to either be a monolithic ogre or a number of absurd little fiefdoms?
I choose the latter, I don't care if I have to use a 14.4K Modem.
(hell...we can compress porn...right?...)
Humanity will have to get offplanet.
Fast
I've been wondering about alternatives as well.
It seems all the English speaking nations are on the way to being police states.
What's the scoop on Switzerland?
Are there any swiss folk here who could give us some insight?
And then it became so much easier.
Balmer et al wouldn't understand it anyway.
Mr. Balmer and your associates. I believe I speak for all of us when I say.
"Fuck off. You can't compete, you lost. Go throw chairs"
Ya....
and you'll have any fucking chance with civilian grade weaponry.
Keep dreaming.
Remember, only criminals would want assault rifles!
"hates traditional american values"
/.
This is such a useless, broad and void statement.
What this basically translates to is "disagrees with my moral beliefs" (usually which wedge issues)
which, by the way, is meaningless.
You'd even have trouble getting people to agree on what traditional american values are.
Mom and Applepie?
Freedom/Liberty/American Way (tm)?
Loving Jesus, pickup trucks and hating queers?
Civil Disobedience?
Entrepenuership?
You could get all these varied responses (to name a few)
So your "traditional american values" bullshit just serves as a very broad attack with no real basis.
Please check your idiocy at the gate when entering
please do tell,
where is this place?
I can't think of anywhere not either on its own path to horror or that is not imminently threatened by the states.
The proper punishment for treason against a country and its foundations, for everything that makes it anything of value, is death, in plain view, so that we can know the bastards are truely dead.
Those we revere for initiating violence to throw off a corrupt an cruel government had the names of Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Madison and Franklin (among others)
What names will be remembered 200 years from now when children read about the second revolutionary war?
I don't see why this is viewed as funny; this is a fabulous idea. We should implement this regardless.
God I remember high school....blech. I mean, I went a fairly decent one in Chicago, public yes. Gah...I still felt like I was in a prison and I was in one of the nicest ones around. Nothing against my high school in particular, it's just the way they're run, like factories where you had better line up and do what you're told; and if you step out of line, you'll get slammed.
This country stopped being what it was a long time ago.
It has become a sham. We all just have it in the back of our minds "that's how it is".
We accept the corruption, idiocy and incompetence because we're used to it.
This shit needs to stop, the buck passing, the lies, the outright flaunted decadence and waste.
I don't believe in capital punishment, except for an exceptional set. I believe in the death penalty for any government employee who works to subvert/attack/damage the constitution/ourRights/democratic processes. In that case I believe it should be the default.
Fine, I'm a radical, whatever. The fact is, such people hold the lives and rights of others in their hands, they have more responsibility. The penalty for corruption and treason, yes TREASON, should be death. Treason is thrown around by all the political camps like water, "it's treasonous!" they'll yell. No, high treason is betraying one's country, NOT ONE'S GOVERNMENT. When a politician sells out the people or the country, they are high traitors, and I'd like to see them put to death in PUBLIC. Public for cruelty? Public to incite fear? No, hardly, public for the same reason the bodies of Saddam Hussein's sons were put on display. To prove to the people "YES THEY ARE REALLY DEAD". In such a time, and particularly with these dealmaking weasels, it might be neccessary.
Fuck Hunting; This is why I'm a second ammendment supporter.
the end results would probably be similar.
oh, and the number of people who vote would sky rocket.
This just goes to show that there are a great number of things that should not be computerized/network connected etc. /.ers (particularly those of us in the states). Do you ever feel like you're strapped to a chair with a wet towel over your head surrounded by people who can't tie their own shoes without managing to injure themselves?
Just as one should not have an internet accessible refrigerator "mom! someone hacked the fridge again and turned the cooling off! Oh god the smell!!"
One should not have electronic voting machines. Seriously, why the hell do we need electronic voting other than that a great deal of people were, excuse my honesty, too goddamn stupid to understand how to use a paper ballot.
Another case of the ignorant masses rising up, bitching about how things are "too hard" and overcoming those of us who can follow simply printed instructions with their sheer moronic numbers.
Fellow
Is it still too early in the "OMG WE'RE FUCKED" process to just start shooting these bastards in the throat?
Or are we going to wait around and twiddle our thumbs for a while yet?
.....touche.. I should have remembered that.. bah....I had blocked those people out of my memory...
Everyone declaring so much of this "sick" "disgusting" etc etc.
Please stfu.
Are people being harmed against their will in such images/videos? Any reputable studio has documentation on file showing this not to be the case.
The performers are doing these things without being coerced (a lot are even into it! imagine that).
How long ago was it that people would refer to homosexuality as "sick, disgusting" et al? If I was to start saying those sorts of things I would get modded into oblivion so fast my head would spin. There is an extremely broad range of what people refer to as "violent pornography"
Is violent pornography rough sex?
bdsm related things?
simulated forced?
no one can answer can they? Why? Because it's all so incredibly vague, and it's intended to be that way. The more vague the description is the more the folks enforcing it can cite things like snuff films (without noting of course that posession of snuff porn and the sites serving it are ALREADY illegal because they involve an actual MURDER) whilst shutting down sites that people who happen to be a little kinked like, sites that are harming no one.
This is pure idiocy, and a move by the morality gestapo to push, more and more, "deviants" out to the edge.
Isn't anyone the least bit bothered that this is basically another "mothers against $HORRIBLEVILTHINGTHATWILLSURELYDESTROYSOCIETY" group?
It gets to where I think the US and UK are in a race to see who can come up with the most rediculous legislation the quickest.
You're a flaming idiot. You're going to forbid basic acts of commerce with what the kids have? Why don't you forbid them from trading anything at all? Oh, and I really want to know how the hell you plan to enforce such an asinine ban. Are we going to link individual pieces of food to each child via some sort of electronic sensor? And don't say that I'm somehow hyperbolising things, becuase other than having a teacher/adult watching over every child in that lunch room (which is pretty much just as bad) that's what would be neccessary. Also, yes the school DOES exist to bring forth the ideological libertarian start in kids. It should teach them to critically think and be rational which leads to (SURPIRSE!!) libertarianism (to some degree anyway). You do realize that schools teach more than the hard sciences (math, physics etc as you listed them)...right? There are government classes...language...literature.
I'm sorry but this is one of the dumber posts I've ever read on slashdot. And that's saying something.
Please either think, or don't post.
A hopeful response.
Thank you, it brightened my day
To hasten the day, spread the word, keep up the hope and try to show people the problems, the inconsistencies, the bullshit.
If it doesn't happen?
Learn to survive in the rough.
Learn how to use weapons, small arms and otherwise.
Get on friendly terms with farmers/ food sources.
The currencies will be food/fuel/medical supplies.
Learn basic first aid/little more advanced stuff.
Realize and accept that it will take a literal revolution and war to take back this land.
Win that gorram war
Yes, the president is not /supposed/ to do a lot of things. He does them anyway. Congress is not /supposed/ to do a lot of things, they do them anyway. (repeat ad nauseam for judicial, various agencies). .22!!)
They do it anyway of course. Because who's going to stop them? The citizens? Bah! they say. "The citizens are no threat! We have them quaking in their boots about an unlikely threat that is, in reality, less dangerous than car accidents or accidents in the home. They work for us, they are ours"
The government has forgotten who they are working for. Perhaps several hundred thousand (or existence help me, a million) citizens armed to the teeth in DC would get the message across?
I'm not sure how else to put this.
We fear them. There are people I know; bright, educated, rational people, who are actually afraid of the government coming and ruining their lives for no good reason. Some worry about it happening irrationally, others worry very, very rationally.
What does it say about a country when its best citizens are afraid of their government and literally believe they have no recourse?
The idea that one can simply be "disappeared", that civil rights can be taken by executive authority, that things can be swept under the carpet by the two words "national security"...what does this say about our nation?...
Consider the idea that what we currently have is the three branches of government granting each other (or sometimes themselves) powers that are either entirely unmentioned or forbidden by the constitution. There is a great quote from Firefly by Book that sums a lot of it up. "A Government is simply a body of men...usually ungoverned themselves".
We need to come back and start governing our government. We need to fight back, literally. They used to be afraid of being voted out...they fixed that with a duopoly of Republicrats and Diebold voting machines. They were afraid of militias, uprisings, they fixed that by labling people terrorists who simply wanted to be armed and have a chance against tyranny that might arise (and it has) and by eroding the 2nd Ammendment. So then it came to people believing they really had no say in government, and having to be afraid of the wide powers of the government being used to ruin their personal lives and to have very little, if any, recourse.
Now, what does it all come down to in the end?
"Do what we say. Obey...or we will hurt you"
Hurt. Gunshot, prison, torture, blunt trauma, psychological torment. That is the source of power of any government in the end.
COERCION.
What, in the end then, is the only true recourse against a government that refuses all other recourse?
That which they cannot refuse. The people of the country, collectively, being much more heavily armed than they are.
I think every member of our government should live in mortal fear of the taxpayers figuritively (and literally) killing them. Because come on, it takes a LOT to piss Americans off (which is also rather depressing to me. Where are the days where we would tar and feather British officials?) So the basic concept comes to, if you manage to violate enough of the rights of the American people, I firmly stand behind them killing you in your sleep, in a vicious and hopefully comical manner. (and I'm not even sure if there's a bit of joking in that statement). More and more it seems "fine, you're going to be above the law? Then we're going to be above the law for a moment to remove you".
V was right, it is not the people that should be afraid of their government, but the government that should be afraid of its people.
The mandatory things:
Learn gun safety,
Learn to shoot (accurately) (START WITH A
Learn to service/care for your weapon(s)
Learn how to survive (as in downed pilot behind enemy lines survive)
Learn about nutrition (seems like a joke until you consider how important it really is to know what's important enough to bring with you)
Learn how your car/vehicle works, seriously. Learn