BTW, your last question is not really a matter of engineering, software or otherwise. How does a pacemaker "decrease the amount of repetitive work that humans have to do"?
5 Ways Pacemakers Decrease Repetitive Work:
5. Heart attacks occur less frequently
4. Doctor orders you to take it easy
3. All that heart beating can wear a person down
2. Less CPR
1. Heart massages limited to the weekends
I would just like to inform everyone that I have a patent on small planet like bodies found between the orbit of Neptune and Pluto discovered with telescopes as well as methods for including their names into mnemonic memory devices.
If I remember correctly from government class, it was orginally created because those in charge of the government did not trust the common people with little or no education to be able to vote responsibly, so they implented this as a system of being able to override that.
Actually, it was set up that way because the people were never intended to elect the President, the -STATES- elect the President. You have to remember, the United States was intended to be like the European Union... seperate Nations (States) United.
Of course, it has deviated considerably from that.
Redhat is obviously not making any money from their sparc version, and is making the smart decision to drop it. If people were buying it, they would certainly keep producing it, it's a business decision, and a good one.
My question to the person submitting this article is, did you buy the sparc version, or did you download it?
I've got an even better question for the submitter. Are you willing to provide support a Sparc distribution?
There is, after all, nothing stopping you from rolling your own distribution. If you feel there is a market for it, do it yourself.
ME:If you want to prevent me from going to McD's, you've crossed the line
YOU:We seem to be in agreement on this point, so why do you assert a mere desire to prevent you from going is crossing a line?
You're reading too much into that. I intended my statement to be interpreted as "If you try to prevent me from going...". I agree that the wording less than perfect.
Picketing isn't a bad idea either. Nor is publising (perhaps on a web page, and in the local newspaper) the reasons other might want to also not go to McDonalds (or buy a particular shoe, or brekfast cerial).
I agree whole-heartedly with your right, and the rights of others to do this.
One person alone skipping a product they dislike is a start, but if they actually want to get rid of the hated thing they need to convice others to skip the product as well. Fortunitly in this country there are plenty of protected free speach rights they can use to do so (well to attempt to do so, they have no right to actually convice anyone of anything, just the right to try). I expect france isn't exactly lacking either.
Again, while I support the right of prople to voice their opinions, I do not understand the desire to remove from others the ability to do things you disagree with (this is in reference to the part about "if they actually want to get rid of the hated thing"). If you don't like McD's, fine. If you don't want to eat there, fine. If you want to very publicly state your position against McD's, fine. If you want to peacefully discourage others from eating at McD's, fine. If you want to prevent me from going to McD's, you've crossed the line.
People are idiots because they refuse to think. The brain, like a muscle, atropies when not used. Sure there ARE predators out there that are out to rip people off, but failing to read the fine print on a contract or not doing simple math is no excuse to cry injustice. There are certain survival skills that all of us have to follow, whether it be in the jungle or in the city. Failing to grasp the simpler skills makes you an easy target.
We live in a society that more and more encourages irresponsibility. It's the root of the theory "Make sure there's someone to sue if something goes wrong". The libertarian philosophy encourages greater responsibility. If the government refuses to protect people from their own stupidity, people WILL pay more attention to what they are doing and act accordingly.
Right now, if you don't like your job, just act completely irresponsible, get fired, and let the government give you food, money, housing, and pay for your college. That is insane.
In a Libertarian society, you better hope there is someone out there that cares anough about you to support you or you're going to starve if you pull a stunt like that.
I could go on and on with examples. Instead I'll summarize by saying that people will act responsibly if there is no profit in irresponsibility. We need cut out the free lunch for an entire segment of society that is being bred to vote. Then, instead of being leaches, they will either become productive, or starve. That's a hell of an incentive to get your head out of your ass, wouldn't you agree?
The most racist and sexist industry in this country is the same one we rely on for our news and entertainment.
You rely on the church for your news and entertainment???
I realize this sounds like off topic flaimbait, but frankly you can find the root of most social functions (and disfunctions) in the relegion of that society -- even among the non-relegious.
What we are beginning to see is a departure from the classic social and relegious ideas about the roles of various groups in the culture. There is a clash between what many of us think is right and good, and what we have be taught and exposed to as "normal".
I suspect what we will see happen is what always seems to happen. The "rebelious" ideas that work will find their way into mainstream. The "Establishment" will change to embrace the new ideas. And the "rebels" will move on to new unwelcome ideas.... most likely the exact opposite of what the "rebels" of a generation before were championing.
Its good to read the contracts... but since... IANAL, I guess I'll have to pay one to be on call 24/7
Just don't do business with a company who's policies you don't like. It's that simple.
Before I go any farther, let me point out that the following rant is not aimed directly at the response I replied to, but at many of the posts I have read thus far:
// Rant mode starts here What is it with all these posts. You people are like zombies... "Must make purchase at all costs... must not take time to read... must buy... must buy... must buy..."
Then, instead of saying "Some consumers are irresponsible, lazy, retards" you all start chanting "Companies bad, companies bad, companies bad, companies bad". It all starts sounding like: "Companies bad, must purchace their products, companies bad, must purchase their products, companies bad, must purchase their products, companies bad, must purchase their products..."
This kind of thing is exactly why I don't understand the positions of Libertarians...
As a Libertarian, I will attempt to explain my position.
(apologies to Eric Raymond, of course). There are obviously people and--more often--corporations who purposefully deceive consumers to the fullest extent possible for the sake of making a big fat profit. That's why we have things like fraud laws and agencies like the FTC to enforce them.
The protection of the people against initiation of force and fraud are about the only things Libertarians DO believe is the role of government. Libertarians absolutely oppose the use of fraud.
It isn't easy for average Americans (bless their dim li'l hearts) to see through these kinds of offers, and it's great to see people who know what they're doing trying to protect them. Kudos to the FTC.
Here is where we actually depart ways. I do not believe the average American is an idiot. I believe people should be free. With that freedom, comes responsibility. A society that protects its citizens from responsibility is not a free society. Would you really want to live in an "idiot proof" society? Are you willing to give up your rights as an adult in order to have the government raise you children for you? Are you willing to give up a free market in order to avoid having to read the fine print?
But for a secret-sharing protocol, or as a way to securely store information in a way which is deniable, it's pretty dismal.
From reading the article, it seemed to me the point was not to securely store any information, but to freely circulate it. The only thing meant to be obscured was the identity of the sender.
After some mathematics, Alice's super-secret Neiman-Marcus cookie recipe is now pretty much totally obscured. She posts the recipe to a Website, and then tells Bob and Charlie, "Psst! I posted the information to this site. Find pads with IDs of [she recites their IDs] and use that to recover the information!"
I understand your point here, but if instead Alice went down to the public library posted the information to a news group on how to retrieve the recipe, then the information is free and difficult to rein in, at least politically.
Re:Why don't we give this a chance to mirror...
on
Mozilla M16 Released
·
· Score: 1
It's too bad, because during that 10 minutes it rocks.
Computer: I'm sorry, you have failed login too many times. Your account has been locked. Please call Microsoft Tech Support at 1-900-SCREWME for assistance. Only $5 a minute!
MS Tech Support: Hi may I help you?
User: Yes, my system locked up when I tried to enter my password.
MS Tech Support: Please hold.
... 45 minutes later...
MS Tech Support: Just click the cancel button, it'll let you right in. The charge of $225.00 will be double billed to your credit card.
This software has no chance of working as the developers expect. In the course of reading the article I came up with two ways to defeat it as a copy protection scheme.
1. A program that monitors the keyboard and records a "profile". This profile can be distributed along with the file and there goes the copy protection.
2. This one is blatently obvious... run your sound output back into your input and make a perfect digital copy without the copy protection.
What do these morons think they are going to accomplish?
Making digital signatures legally binding scares the shit out of me.
Why is that any more scary than signatures made from scraping ink across paper? Don't you know children are taught how to do that? Why, a clever person could use that ink scraping knowledge to forge a signature.
Why are huge downloads necessary if you are just upgrading? Do I have to get on a bunch of mailing lists to figure out what is new and hunt down those files myself?
With Mandrake all you do is click the icon on the desktop that says "Updates", pick a mirror, and select the updated files you want to install. What's so hard about that?
Now, if you want the new distribution, you have to download the new distribution. But mainly all you're getting is the new installer and other bells and whistles.
It comes down to: Do you want the lastest files, or do you want to be able to say you have the latest distribution?
... Here's what's really going on: Microsoft is releasing all these worms themselves. They are trying to position VB Script at the most Elite, rad cool, programming language on earth... used by all the "big" hackers, crackers, and hell, the phreaks too.. Since they couldn't come out and openly advertise a product designed for hackers (what with that pesky lawsuit and all) they advertise by example...
While I'm a long time Amiga-user and love(d) the system, I can't really get excited about the resurrection of the platform.
My second computer was a Commodore 64 (the first being a Texas Insturments TI-99/4A). I followed Commodore all the way up to the Amiga 4000 which I ran a 5 line BBS on. I loved their products, but I too am finding it hard to get excited about this.
It just doesn't feel like an Amiga. The multitasking operating system (in a time when no other home computer could touch that) was a big draw for me to the Amiga. But it wasn't just the OS, it was the complete hardware/software integration of multiple co-processors tied up neatly in an efficient OS.
The Amiga had charm, the Amiga was sleek and efficient, the Amiga (in a cheesy sort of way) was, computationally speeking, a way of life.
This sounds too much like they are releasing a OS shell, much like early Windows versions were just a shell that ran on top of DOS. It sounds like a horrible kludge. It makes me sad.
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, your last question is not really a matter of engineering, software or otherwise. How does a pacemaker "decrease the amount of repetitive work that humans have to do"?
5 Ways Pacemakers Decrease Repetitive Work:
5. Heart attacks occur less frequently
4. Doctor orders you to take it easy
3. All that heart beating can wear a person down
2. Less CPR
1. Heart massages limited to the weekends
I would just like to inform everyone that I have a patent on small planet like bodies found between the orbit of Neptune and Pluto discovered with telescopes as well as methods for including their names into mnemonic memory devices.
So, pay up everyone.
I mean, it's not like anyone living on Jupiter gets more federal tax dollars money than those people living on Asteroid M- or Pluto.
But here in Memphis, it does affect how many times they get to vote in local elections after they die.
If I remember correctly from government class, it was orginally created because those in charge of the government did not trust the common people with little or no education to be able to vote responsibly, so they implented this as a system of being able to override that.
Actually, it was set up that way because the people were never intended to elect the President, the -STATES- elect the President. You have to remember, the United States was intended to be like the European Union... seperate Nations (States) United.
Of course, it has deviated considerably from that.
Redhat is obviously not making any money from their sparc version, and is making the smart decision to drop it. If people were buying it, they would certainly keep producing it, it's a business decision, and a good one.
My question to the person submitting this article is, did you buy the sparc version, or did you download it?
I've got an even better question for the submitter. Are you willing to provide support a Sparc distribution?
There is, after all, nothing stopping you from rolling your own distribution. If you feel there is a market for it, do it yourself.
This isn't spam, it a frickin' worm.
How many of you are just reading the comments on this article for the inevitable mysql vs postgresql vs commercial db flame fest? :)
I'm reading this for the intelligent, thought provoking discussion which is sure to follow... err.. OK, you're right.
ME: If you want to prevent me from going to McD's, you've crossed the line
YOU: We seem to be in agreement on this point, so why do you assert a mere desire to prevent you from going is crossing a line?
You're reading too much into that. I intended my statement to be interpreted as "If you try to prevent me from going...". I agree that the wording less than perfect.
Picketing isn't a bad idea either. Nor is publising (perhaps on a web page, and in the local newspaper) the reasons other might want to also not go to McDonalds (or buy a particular shoe, or brekfast cerial).
I agree whole-heartedly with your right, and the rights of others to do this.
One person alone skipping a product they dislike is a start, but if they actually want to get rid of the hated thing they need to convice others to skip the product as well. Fortunitly in this country there are plenty of protected free speach rights they can use to do so (well to attempt to do so, they have no right to actually convice anyone of anything, just the right to try). I expect france isn't exactly lacking either.
Again, while I support the right of prople to voice their opinions, I do not understand the desire to remove from others the ability to do things you disagree with (this is in reference to the part about "if they actually want to get rid of the hated thing"). If you don't like McD's, fine. If you don't want to eat there, fine. If you want to very publicly state your position against McD's, fine. If you want to peacefully discourage others from eating at McD's, fine. If you want to prevent me from going to McD's, you've crossed the line.
People are idiots because they refuse to think. The brain, like a muscle, atropies when not used. Sure there ARE predators out there that are out to rip people off, but failing to read the fine print on a contract or not doing simple math is no excuse to cry injustice. There are certain survival skills that all of us have to follow, whether it be in the jungle or in the city. Failing to grasp the simpler skills makes you an easy target.
We live in a society that more and more encourages irresponsibility. It's the root of the theory "Make sure there's someone to sue if something goes wrong". The libertarian philosophy encourages greater responsibility. If the government refuses to protect people from their own stupidity, people WILL pay more attention to what they are doing and act accordingly.
Right now, if you don't like your job, just act completely irresponsible, get fired, and let the government give you food, money, housing, and pay for your college. That is insane.
In a Libertarian society, you better hope there is someone out there that cares anough about you to support you or you're going to starve if you pull a stunt like that.
I could go on and on with examples. Instead I'll summarize by saying that people will act responsibly if there is no profit in irresponsibility. We need cut out the free lunch for an entire segment of society that is being bred to vote. Then, instead of being leaches, they will either become productive, or starve. That's a hell of an incentive to get your head out of your ass, wouldn't you agree?
The most racist and sexist industry in this country is the same one we rely on for our news and entertainment.
You rely on the church for your news and entertainment???
I realize this sounds like off topic flaimbait, but frankly you can find the root of most social functions (and disfunctions) in the relegion of that society -- even among the non-relegious.
What we are beginning to see is a departure from the classic social and relegious ideas about the roles of various groups in the culture. There is a clash between what many of us think is right and good, and what we have be taught and exposed to as "normal".
I suspect what we will see happen is what always seems to happen. The "rebelious" ideas that work will find their way into mainstream. The "Establishment" will change to embrace the new ideas. And the "rebels" will move on to new unwelcome ideas.... most likely the exact opposite of what the "rebels" of a generation before were championing.
Its good to read the contracts... but since... IANAL, I guess I'll have to pay one to be on call 24/7
// Rant mode starts here
// end rant
Just don't do business with a company who's policies you don't like. It's that simple.
Before I go any farther, let me point out that the following rant is not aimed directly at the response I replied to, but at many of the posts I have read thus far:
What is it with all these posts. You people are like zombies... "Must make purchase at all costs... must not take time to read... must buy... must buy... must buy..."
Then, instead of saying "Some consumers are irresponsible, lazy, retards" you all start chanting "Companies bad, companies bad, companies bad, companies bad". It all starts sounding like: "Companies bad, must purchace their products, companies bad, must purchase their products, companies bad, must purchase their products, companies bad, must purchase their products..."
Puke
This kind of thing is exactly why I don't understand the positions of Libertarians...
As a Libertarian, I will attempt to explain my position.
(apologies to Eric Raymond, of course). There are obviously people and--more often--corporations who purposefully deceive consumers to the fullest extent possible for the sake of making a big fat profit. That's why we have things like fraud laws and agencies like the FTC to enforce them.
The protection of the people against initiation of force and fraud are about the only things Libertarians DO believe is the role of government. Libertarians absolutely oppose the use of fraud.
It isn't easy for average Americans (bless their dim li'l hearts) to see through these kinds of offers, and it's great to see people who know what they're doing trying to protect them. Kudos to the FTC.
Here is where we actually depart ways. I do not believe the average American is an idiot. I believe people should be free. With that freedom, comes responsibility. A society that protects its citizens from responsibility is not a free society. Would you really want to live in an "idiot proof" society? Are you willing to give up your rights as an adult in order to have the government raise you children for you? Are you willing to give up a free market in order to avoid having to read the fine print?
Does anyone know what we actually can do with this information?
In a sense, the source code for humans has just been opened up. Let you mind wander...
Immortality is now just a matter of finding the right genes to tweek. Lost you arm in a car accident? Trigger some dormant genes and grow a new one.
This stuff isn't science fiction any more. Now these things are simply technological challenges.
But for a secret-sharing protocol, or as a way to securely store information in a way which is deniable, it's pretty dismal.
From reading the article, it seemed to me the point was not to securely store any information, but to freely circulate it. The only thing meant to be obscured was the identity of the sender.
After some mathematics, Alice's super-secret Neiman-Marcus cookie recipe is now pretty much totally obscured. She posts the recipe to a Website, and then tells Bob and Charlie, "Psst! I posted the information to this site. Find pads with IDs of [she recites their IDs] and use that to recover the information!"
I understand your point here, but if instead Alice went down to the public library posted the information to a news group on how to retrieve the recipe, then the information is free and difficult to rein in, at least politically.
It's too bad, because during that 10 minutes it rocks.
Yeah, that's about how fast it is for mee, too.
Computer: I'm sorry, you have failed login too many times. Your account has been locked. Please call Microsoft Tech Support at 1-900-SCREWME for assistance. Only $5 a minute!
... 45 minutes later ...
MS Tech Support: Hi may I help you?
User: Yes, my system locked up when I tried to enter my password.
MS Tech Support: Please hold.
MS Tech Support: Just click the cancel button, it'll let you right in. The charge of $225.00 will be double billed to your credit card.
This software has no chance of working as the developers expect. In the course of reading the article I came up with two ways to defeat it as a copy protection scheme.
1. A program that monitors the keyboard and records a "profile". This profile can be distributed along with the file and there goes the copy protection.
2. This one is blatently obvious... run your sound output back into your input and make a perfect digital copy without the copy protection.
What do these morons think they are going to accomplish?
Smiley rule #1: Don't use a smiley wherer even an untrained baboon could see it's humour.
:)
Making digital signatures legally binding scares the shit out of me.
Why is that any more scary than signatures made from scraping ink across paper? Don't you know children are taught how to do that? Why, a clever person could use that ink scraping knowledge to forge a signature.
Lastly, Quantum Leaps are the =smallest= leaps possible.
Uh, no, Quantum Leaps would be leaps of some undefined -quantity-.... hence the term Quantum.
Those of you who fall for this blind "All corporations are bad" are as dumb as those who completely believe the opposite. Quit being rubes.
*CLAP* *CLAP* *CLAP*
If I could, I'd bump you up a few more points. Your response was the first intelligent thing longer than a sentence I've seen on this subject.
Thank you for showing there is intelligent life out there.
Why are huge downloads necessary if you are just upgrading? Do I have to get on a bunch of mailing lists to figure out what is new and hunt down those files myself?
With Mandrake all you do is click the icon on the desktop that says "Updates", pick a mirror, and select the updated files you want to install. What's so hard about that?
Now, if you want the new distribution, you have to download the new distribution. But mainly all you're getting is the new installer and other bells and whistles.
It comes down to: Do you want the lastest files, or do you want to be able to say you have the latest distribution?
... Here's what's really going on: Microsoft is releasing all these worms themselves. They are trying to position VB Script at the most Elite, rad cool, programming language on earth... used by all the "big" hackers, crackers, and hell, the phreaks too.. Since they couldn't come out and openly advertise a product designed for hackers (what with that pesky lawsuit and all) they advertise by example...
Yeah, that's the ticket.
While I'm a long time Amiga-user and love(d) the system, I can't really get excited about the resurrection of the platform.
My second computer was a Commodore 64 (the first being a Texas Insturments TI-99/4A). I followed Commodore all the way up to the Amiga 4000 which I ran a 5 line BBS on. I loved their products, but I too am finding it hard to get excited about this.
It just doesn't feel like an Amiga. The multitasking operating system (in a time when no other home computer could touch that) was a big draw for me to the Amiga. But it wasn't just the OS, it was the complete hardware/software integration of multiple co-processors tied up neatly in an efficient OS.
The Amiga had charm, the Amiga was sleek and efficient, the Amiga (in a cheesy sort of way) was, computationally speeking, a way of life.
This sounds too much like they are releasing a OS shell, much like early Windows versions were just a shell that ran on top of DOS. It sounds like a horrible kludge. It makes me sad.