>>>Republicans who had control of both the White House and Congress from 2001-2006 is appalling. If they saw something wrong, they had a free hand
THE DEMOCRATS had control of Congress from 2007-8. If they saw something wrong, they had a free hand to correct it. (For that matter, Democratic president Clinton could have vetoed the bill in 1999, and thereby kept Glass-Steagall in full force.)
FOX is less socialist than NBC, CBS, ABC, et cetera, but they are still socialist. They still air reports about why the government should provide Uncle Sam Healthcare.
here's the actual vote: SENATE: 100% Democrats; 100% Republicans (unaminous) HOUSE: 90% Democrats; 85% Republicans (veto-proof) PRESIDENT: Signed by *democrat* William J. Clinton in 1998.
What was that about being a "republican" bill? It looks like a typical Duopoly bill to me, supported by BOTH sides, since they both pretty much act alike.
CBS and FOX won't do it to Obama because they *like* Obama. They don't mind if Obama uses their videos to help him win the election.
>>>I hope they pursue this by addressing flaws in the DMCA.
Since McCain is not going to win (the economy is down & people blame Republicans*), he won't be able to do much about reforming DMCA. He'll just be one of one hundred senators.
* * (The real blame lies with the 1990s president who repealed the Glass-Steagall of 1933 which allowed banks to invest in risky stocks, and thereby created the current crisis. But the media is being hush-hush about that. Don't want to risk losing the Obama election.)
E-voting is okay, so long as it spits-out a paper "receipt" of the vote. That way if the machine is suspect, a pair of Republican-Democrat auditors can sit down and start handcounting the receipts. This provides two levels of verifiability.
I'd rather just go shopping for a coffin, get my affairs in order, and accept the inevitable. You can't live forever; now is as good a day to die as any.
>>> equip high schools with 'one laptop per child'
This sounds like a huge waste of money to me. In every class where the teacher has tried to use a computer, we wasted tons of time trying to make the software work, rather than actually learning something useful. The computer-centric courses were actually my least-useful courses.
All a high school student really needs is a pen, some paper for taking notes, and a $5 calculator. Focus on exercising the brain & absorbing the knowledge into that brain, so it can later be applied to solving problems on tests. IMHO.
Nonsense. The air is thin but not THAT thin. B-29 Superfortresses routinely flew at that height, via human piloting. You don't "need" an autopilot.
> >>>incorrect information... prompted flight control computers to put the jet into a 197-meter nosedive.
Nice. I hear that car manufacturers want to include similar accident-avoidance measures in cars. That's just what I need - my car's old computer going senile, and suddenly swerving me head-on into oncoming traffic.
Clearly you don't understand a very simple concept:
If WBAL in Baltimore is broadcasting on channel 11, and somebody's white-space-enabled Ipod *also* starts broadcasting on channel 11, then there will be interference with one another. The FCC should not allow Ipods or any other devices to be overlapping channel 2 to 51. Those should be reserved for television, and nothing else.
Thanks for the correction. I revise my list like so:
Family 2: Intel i860 prototype OS (never released) Windows NT 3.1 (actually 1.0 but named 3.1 for marketing reasons) Windows NT 4.0 (1996) Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000) Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001) Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006) Windows NT 6.1? (Windows 7)
Family 1 (MS-DOS based shells) Windows 1.0 Windows 2.0 Windows 3.0 Windows 3.1 Windows 95 Windows 98/ME DEAD (no longer updated by Microsoft)
It's probably NT 6.1 now, but will be NT 7.0 when finally released. It doesn't really make sense to say "6.1" because this is not a trivial update to Vista (NT 6.0)... from what I've read the next version will be a major rewrite.
>>>it's still preferable to have a free wireless broadband data network over a free DTV network.
Feldercarb. How am I supposed to get tornado or other storm warnings if my DTV doesn't work??? Free over-the-air DTV warnings & alerts that SAVE PEOPLE'S LIVES are *far* more important than the ability to stream Miley Cyrus radio with your Iwidget.
>>>yea, it's just too bad you don't own the airwaves. the radio spectrum is a shared public resource--
That's no excuse for broadcasting over top of existing NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CW, MyNetTV, PBS, Ion, et cetera television channels. Those of us who rely on over-the-air television already gave-up channels 52 to 83 for cellphones and wireless internet. Stop being so "entitled" and greedy. Leave channels 2 to 51 alone!
> >>>it may be an inconvenience to you that you cannot receive DTV signals from far outside of their broadcast area
I'm NOT outside my broadcast area. I'm inside Washington D.C.'s designated area, but it just so happens that signals are weak here. I can get them so long as nobody turns-on an interfering transmitter (like a white space gadget).
> >>> stop thinking so small and try to see the bigger picture here.
You first. I don't think I should have to give-up my access to live television (and tornado or other storm warnings) just so you can download some porn. There's plenty of other bands you could use. How about channels 52 to 83 - use them.
Here's a video produced by the National Association of Broadcasters that shows what happens when somebody uses a "white space" gadget to connect to the internet on-top of an existing station:
I hope Congress does the right thing and turns-down the use of these devices on channels 2-to-51. I don't want my television viewing to devolve to the poor interference displayed in the video.
So why did the FCC decide the freebie wireless internet (discussed in the article) needs to be filtered. You did read the frakking article didn't you? Let me quote it for you:
"Martin's proposal is to auction off the spectrum, with some rules attached. Some of the spectrum would be used for free Internet service, which would have content filters to block material considered inappropriate for children."
Here's a video produced by the National Association of Broadcasters that shows what happens when somebody uses a "white space" gadget to connect to the internet on-top of an existing station:
Yes but they were not part of the current family. That "line" of programs has come to a halt:
Family 1 (MS-DOS based shells) Windows 1.0 Windows 2.0 Windows 3.0 Windows 3.1 Windows 95 Windows 98 Windows ME DEAD (no longer updated by Microsoft)
Family 2: IBM/microsoft OS/2 1.0 (joint venture) IBM/microsoft OS/2 2.0 (joint) IBM/microsoft OS/2 3.0 (never-released prototype) Windows NT 3.1 (the program that resulted after microsoft split from IBM) Windows NT 4.0 (1996) Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000) Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001) Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006) Windows NT 7.0 (Windows 7)
I hope that clears things up, and it makes sense when viewed in that manner. Windows 7 is a logical progression of the NT family over the last ~25 years.
I don't buy the "marijuana causes no damage" argument. Even if its effects were as harmless as water, you're still breathing-in smoke & particulates, which over time will damage the lungs.
If you want to smoke, go ahead, because it's your body, but don't try to claim it's not harmful. To do that makes you as bad as the politicians (using lies to advance a cause).
So CAPTCHA images are ineffective at blocking the bots. No surprise. It won't be long before these AIs start joining Yahoo or Google mail for the same reasons we do: Chatting.
tiredbot&yahoo.com : "Boy I had a rough day at work today. My user wanted me to compile a new program AND surf the internet at the same time!"
spamalot@gmail.com: "Wow rough. I was lucky. My user took the day off, so I just spend the day spamming. I love how those humans react - sending me hategrams. hahahahaha! That just makes me want to send more spam! Fools."
I agree the web should not be censored, but if the web is available from, say, your television web browser, then it makes sense to filter the content to protect the children.
And that's exactly what the FCC decision does - it provides free internet over-the-air, but filters it.
Worthless pieces-of-junk. It wasn't until Win95 that Microsoft finally produced something usable, and of course they did it by copying the Macintosh's Finder interface (even the trashbin), so of course it was good.
Windows is actually TWO families of programs, and each family follows a divergent path:
Family 1 (MS-DOS based shells) Windows 1.0 Windows 2.0 Windows 3.0 Windows 3.1 Windows 95 Windows 98 Windows ME DEAD (no longer updated by Microsoft)
Family 2: IBM/microsoft OS/2 1.0 (joint venture) IBM/microsoft OS/2 2.0 (joint) IBM/microsoft OS/2 3.0 (never-released prototype) Windows NT 3.1 (the program that resulted after microsoft split from IBM) Windows NT 4.0 (1996) Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000) Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001) Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006) Windows NT 7.0 (Windows 7)
I hope that clears things up, and it makes sense when viewed in that manner. Windows 7 is a logical progression of programs over the last ~25 years.
>>>Per the wiki, Win 95, 98, and ME are all revisions of version 4, which makes xp 5, vista 6, and 7 7.
No, no, no. You see the "consumer" 16/32-bit version of Windows is dead. It was never updated after Win98/ME. The current versions we use are actually part of the "professional" 32/64-bit NT line, and the major releases include:
Windows NT 3.1 (which was actually 1.0, but Microsoft called it 3.1 for marketing reasons)*
Windows NT 4.0 (1996)
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000)
Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001)
Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006)
Windows NT 7.0 (Windows 7)
* Another reason it may have been called 3.1, was because it was originally supposed to be a joint IBM-Microsoft release of OS/2 3.0 but which later fell apart.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>Republicans who had control of both the White House and Congress from 2001-2006 is appalling. If they saw something wrong, they had a free hand
THE DEMOCRATS had control of Congress from 2007-8. If they saw something wrong, they had a free hand to correct it. (For that matter, Democratic president Clinton could have vetoed the bill in 1999, and thereby kept Glass-Steagall in full force.)
FOX is less socialist than NBC, CBS, ABC, et cetera, but they are still socialist. They still air reports about why the government should provide Uncle Sam Healthcare.
here's the actual vote:
SENATE: 100% Democrats; 100% Republicans (unaminous)
HOUSE: 90% Democrats; 85% Republicans (veto-proof)
PRESIDENT:
Signed by *democrat* William J. Clinton in 1998.
What was that about being a "republican" bill? It looks like a typical Duopoly bill to me, supported by BOTH sides, since they both pretty much act alike.
CBS and FOX won't do it to Obama because they *like* Obama. They don't mind if Obama uses their videos to help him win the election.
>>>I hope they pursue this by addressing flaws in the DMCA.
Since McCain is not going to win (the economy is down & people blame Republicans*), he won't be able to do much about reforming DMCA. He'll just be one of one hundred senators.
*
* (The real blame lies with the 1990s president who repealed the Glass-Steagall of 1933 which allowed banks to invest in risky stocks, and thereby created the current crisis. But the media is being hush-hush about that. Don't want to risk losing the Obama election.)
Why are Apples so darn expensive? I like Macs, but I just can't afford the bill.
(shrug)
I bought a used XP laptop for $70 off ebay. It's a little slower than my desktop, but still plays downloaded TV shows just fine.
E-voting is okay, so long as it spits-out a paper "receipt" of the vote. That way if the machine is suspect, a pair of Republican-Democrat auditors can sit down and start handcounting the receipts. This provides two levels of verifiability.
Before I went to all that trouble,
I'd rather just go shopping for a coffin, get my affairs in order, and accept the inevitable. You can't live forever; now is as good a day to die as any.
>>> equip high schools with 'one laptop per child'
This sounds like a huge waste of money to me. In every class where the teacher has tried to use a computer, we wasted tons of time trying to make the software work, rather than actually learning something useful. The computer-centric courses were actually my least-useful courses.
All a high school student really needs is a pen, some paper for taking notes, and a $5 calculator. Focus on exercising the brain & absorbing the knowledge into that brain, so it can later be applied to solving problems on tests. IMHO.
Nonsense. The air is thin but not THAT thin. B-29 Superfortresses routinely flew at that height, via human piloting. You don't "need" an autopilot.
>
>>>incorrect information... prompted flight control computers to put the jet into a 197-meter nosedive.
Nice. I hear that car manufacturers want to include similar accident-avoidance measures in cars. That's just what I need - my car's old computer going senile, and suddenly swerving me head-on into oncoming traffic.
LINK:
http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/12/0349239
Hope that helps you to understand.
Clearly you don't understand a very simple concept:
If WBAL in Baltimore is broadcasting on channel 11, and somebody's white-space-enabled Ipod *also* starts broadcasting on channel 11, then there will be interference with one another. The FCC should not allow Ipods or any other devices to be overlapping channel 2 to 51. Those should be reserved for television, and nothing else.
>>>>No, No, No. NT did not derive from OS/2.
>
Thanks for the correction. I revise my list like so:
Family 2:
Intel i860 prototype OS (never released)
Windows NT 3.1 (actually 1.0 but named 3.1 for marketing reasons)
Windows NT 4.0 (1996)
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000)
Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001)
Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006)
Windows NT 6.1? (Windows 7)
Family 1 (MS-DOS based shells)
Windows 1.0
Windows 2.0
Windows 3.0
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98/ME
DEAD (no longer updated by Microsoft)
It's probably NT 6.1 now, but will be NT 7.0 when finally released. It doesn't really make sense to say "6.1" because this is not a trivial update to Vista (NT 6.0)... from what I've read the next version will be a major rewrite.
>>>it's still preferable to have a free wireless broadband data network over a free DTV network.
Feldercarb. How am I supposed to get tornado or other storm warnings if my DTV doesn't work??? Free over-the-air DTV warnings & alerts that SAVE PEOPLE'S LIVES are *far* more important than the ability to stream Miley Cyrus radio with your Iwidget.
>>>yea, it's just too bad you don't own the airwaves. the radio spectrum is a shared public resource--
That's no excuse for broadcasting over top of existing NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CW, MyNetTV, PBS, Ion, et cetera television channels. Those of us who rely on over-the-air television already gave-up channels 52 to 83 for cellphones and wireless internet. Stop being so "entitled" and greedy. Leave channels 2 to 51 alone!
>
>>>it may be an inconvenience to you that you cannot receive DTV signals from far outside of their broadcast area
I'm NOT outside my broadcast area. I'm inside Washington D.C.'s designated area, but it just so happens that signals are weak here. I can get them so long as nobody turns-on an interfering transmitter (like a white space gadget).
>
>>> stop thinking so small and try to see the bigger picture here.
You first. I don't think I should have to give-up my access to live television (and tornado or other storm warnings) just so you can download some porn. There's plenty of other bands you could use. How about channels 52 to 83 - use them.
Leave channels 2 to 51 alone.
Here's a video produced by the National Association of Broadcasters that shows what happens when somebody uses a "white space" gadget to connect to the internet on-top of an existing station:
http://broadcastengineering.com/hdtv/video-show-congress-white-space-interference-1014/
I hope Congress does the right thing and turns-down the use of these devices on channels 2-to-51. I don't want my television viewing to devolve to the poor interference displayed in the video.
Okay.
So why did the FCC decide the freebie wireless internet (discussed in the article) needs to be filtered. You did read the frakking article didn't you? Let me quote it for you:
"Martin's proposal is to auction off the spectrum, with some rules attached. Some of the spectrum would be used for free Internet service, which would have content filters to block material considered inappropriate for children."
Here's a video produced by the National Association of Broadcasters that shows what happens when somebody uses a "white space" gadget to connect to the internet on-top of an existing station:
http://broadcastengineering.com/hdtv/video-show-congress-white-space-interference-1014/
Yes but they were not part of the current family. That "line" of programs has come to a halt:
Family 1 (MS-DOS based shells)
Windows 1.0
Windows 2.0
Windows 3.0
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows ME
DEAD (no longer updated by Microsoft)
Family 2:
IBM/microsoft OS/2 1.0 (joint venture)
IBM/microsoft OS/2 2.0 (joint)
IBM/microsoft OS/2 3.0 (never-released prototype)
Windows NT 3.1 (the program that resulted after microsoft split from IBM)
Windows NT 4.0 (1996)
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000)
Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001)
Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006)
Windows NT 7.0 (Windows 7)
I hope that clears things up, and it makes sense when viewed in that manner. Windows 7 is a logical progression of the NT family over the last ~25 years.
I don't buy the "marijuana causes no damage" argument. Even if its effects were as harmless as water, you're still breathing-in smoke & particulates, which over time will damage the lungs.
If you want to smoke, go ahead, because it's your body, but don't try to claim it's not harmful. To do that makes you as bad as the politicians (using lies to advance a cause).
So CAPTCHA images are ineffective at blocking the bots. No surprise. It won't be long before these AIs start joining Yahoo or Google mail for the same reasons we do: Chatting.
tiredbot&yahoo.com : "Boy I had a rough day at work today. My user wanted me to compile a new program AND surf the internet at the same time!"
spamalot@gmail.com: "Wow rough. I was lucky. My user took the day off, so I just spend the day spamming. I love how those humans react - sending me hategrams. hahahahaha! That just makes me want to send more spam! Fools."
tiredbot&yahoo.com : "You are so bad girl."
I agree the web should not be censored, but if the web is available from, say, your television web browser, then it makes sense to filter the content to protect the children.
And that's exactly what the FCC decision does - it provides free internet over-the-air, but filters it.
Even GEOS on the lowly Commodore 64 was a better OS than Windows 1, 2, or 3.
(Compare: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Windows1.0.png versus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GeOS_Commodore_64.gif )
Worthless pieces-of-junk. It wasn't until Win95 that Microsoft finally produced something usable, and of course they did it by copying the Macintosh's Finder interface (even the trashbin), so of course it was good.
Windows is actually TWO families of programs, and each family follows a divergent path:
Family 1 (MS-DOS based shells)
Windows 1.0
Windows 2.0
Windows 3.0
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows ME
DEAD (no longer updated by Microsoft)
Family 2:
IBM/microsoft OS/2 1.0 (joint venture)
IBM/microsoft OS/2 2.0 (joint)
IBM/microsoft OS/2 3.0 (never-released prototype)
Windows NT 3.1 (the program that resulted after microsoft split from IBM)
Windows NT 4.0 (1996)
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000)
Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001)
Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006)
Windows NT 7.0 (Windows 7)
I hope that clears things up, and it makes sense when viewed in that manner. Windows 7 is a logical progression of programs over the last ~25 years.
>>>Per the wiki, Win 95, 98, and ME are all revisions of version 4, which makes xp 5, vista 6, and 7 7.
No, no, no. You see the "consumer" 16/32-bit version of Windows is dead. It was never updated after Win98/ME. The current versions we use are actually part of the "professional" 32/64-bit NT line, and the major releases include:
Windows NT 3.1 (which was actually 1.0, but Microsoft called it 3.1 for marketing reasons)*
Windows NT 4.0 (1996)
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000)
Windows NT 5.1 (XP in 2001)
Windows NT 6.0 (Vista in 2006)
Windows NT 7.0 (Windows 7)
* Another reason it may have been called 3.1, was because it was originally supposed to be a joint IBM-Microsoft release of OS/2 3.0 but which later fell apart.