It sounded like my Commodore Amiga's floppy was trying to pound its head to pieces, and of course it took three times as long to load two programs. After that I learned to run my programs out of the RAM: disk. In defense of myself, the whole multitasking thing was new back then. We users had to learn as we went.
Of course, isn't that how Windows operates today? Multiple programs often try to access the hard drive at the same time, causing the head to make lots of noise. As example, try running Vista on a 256 megabyte machine (and just listen to the hard drive grind). Ugh.
>>>"You seem to think that there is a difference..."
Well in that case:
Why does the Pentagon need to control who wins the election, if there's no difference? They would not need to control anything, since it would not matter who won.;-)
>>>"The other problem is that I am 99% sure that Comcast wouldn't lower rates for the light users, it would keep them the same and hike up rates for users they arbitrarily define as 'heavy"
No Comcast would not lower rates. (Just as they don't offer a la carte.) Fortunately other competitors do offer low rates ($15) for casual users. Isn't competition wonderful?
>>>"And since they have no competition to speak of, they will do so."
You don't have DSL in your area? Or Dish satellite internet? Or wireless internet? If you have any of those, you can't really say there's "no competition".
What I didn't make clear is that future advertising should state explicitly that there's a ~100 gigabyte cap on $40 service. They comcasts of this world need to be open about the terms.
On the other hand, the world is filled with pirates who will not just make a photocopy to go backpacking - they will make 1,000 copies to share with friends. That's what DRM is supposed to prevent from happening.
Unfortunately the way DRM is designed now, it doesn't just punish pirates. It also punishes the innocent user trying to copy his Stephen King book over to an Ipod or CD or email. Thus DRM is too heavy-handed.
There's nothing wrong with the concept of DRM - just the nutjobs in the RIAA who insist that even legal users may not copy their goods over to other devices. The RIAA needs to stop being so paranoid, and adjust the DRM so that it will allow reasonable use (like letting each user have 5 copies of his book, rather than just 1 copy).
Yeah that does seem silly. I would describe a corporation as a "Dictatorship" or "Oligarchy" wherein just the CEO or Board of Directors have a voice, and the employees underneath have none (they must follow the corporate dictates, or else be fired).
I don't think the courts should be granting dictatorships/oligarchies the same legal protections as a person. On the contrary, such dictatorial arrangements that seek to diminish the employee to the level of a "serf" should have no legal status whatsoever. For example, the corporation may speak, but that speech may be revoked, because they are non-free, non-democratic organizations.
Corporations should have revocable privileges, not rights.
There wasn't a court order. The website is still there; it still is available. The only thing that happened was the a Corporate Entity decided to yank the domain name.
Because corporations can do that. They have the money & the power. Hence the need for some kind of "Bill of Rights" that limits that corporate power.
Well the U.S. Supreme Court is, like all courts, required to enforce the laws as written. That means it's required to enforce the Constitution since that is the Supreme Law. It has not done a perfect job, but being *independent* from the control of the Congress/Executive, has allowed it to make some good strong decisions based purely on *law* and not random whims.
(Yes I know the justices are appointed by the president, but history has shown once a justice is in power, he/she often does the opposite of what the president wanted. Once the justice is in place, nobody can exert control over him. His master is the Law, and nothing but the Law, as it should be.)
Thomas Jefferson argued very eloquently, as you did, that the U.S.S.C. is not the final arbitrator. He even suggested State Nullification as an alternative (unconstitutional laws would not be enforced by the state governors).
It didn't work.
If a genius like Jefferson could not find a better solution than the U.S.S.C., then I don't feel qualified to propose anything better. Your idea of "jury nullification" only works if you are dealing with an educated people, and NONE of the founders considered "the people" to be intelligent enough to do that job. (As Winston Churchill said, "The strongest argument against democracy is a 5-minute talk with an average voter." Which is why we have Republics, and not Democracies.)
I certainly would not want my jury, mostly composed of high school grads that can barely read/write, to decide whether or not the police violated my right to privacy when they took my computer filled with naked photographs. I'd likely get a bunch of Christians and Muslims who would think I should be "sentenced to burn in hell" via an electric chair. (Never mind the constitutional protection of freedom of press/speech/home/et cetera.)
No.
Such weighty decisions should be left in the hands of an educated, above-average intelligent body. Namely the State Legislatures, the U.S. Congress, and the Superior/Supreme Courts (especially the latter). Not some joe blow dumbass who lacked enough intelligence to get off jury duty.
(1) The start key on the 800XL probably issued the same command (LOAD "*") but it was automatic, rather than typed. The Commodore 64, being developed earlier, also included an autoload function, but it autoloaded off the cassette drive (the most common device in 1982).
(2)(a) LOAD "*" is nothing exotic. * is just a wildcard that says load the first program. I'm sure you're familiar with wildcards. Right? (Maybe this is another thing that today's users have forgotten.)
(2)(b),8 == use drive 8 (disk drive). 9 == use drive 9. And so on.
(2)(c),1 is optional. Without it, the program loads directly to BASIC, and many programs will work just fine with LOAD "*",8
With the 1, it tells the C64 to dump the operating system and allows the program to fill-up as much space as possible (thus enabling the C64 to use all 64 kilobytes of space for the user application) (Atari800 programs were limited to only 48(?)k of RAM). The first byte in the C64 file usually specified where in memory it should reside.
(3) The drives were not slow once you loaded them with fast-loading software. After that was done, the C64 drives ran faster than did the Atari drives. As example, Microprose's Red Storm Rising loads in just 20 seconds time, thanks to its fast loader.
(4) Commodore 64 also had better sound with triangle and sawtooth generators (atari had none), thus enabling the C64 to sound like various instruments rather than like a touchtone phone. The C64's SID chip still remains popular today, used by artists like Timbaland in their latest over-the-radio creations.
In the 1970s I never even heard of Apple II. My first "love" was an Atari 400. Commodore PET was also popular around that same timeframe.
Sony Walkman is the first MP3 player I ever heard of. I don't know (or care) which was first. What I do know is that I'll never buy an ipod - what an overpriced luxury! (Like buying a Lexus, when all you really need is a Toyota.) My current MP3 player is a $10 gadget from best buy. Works great!
A popular GUI before Macs? Hmmm. GEOS on my Commodore 64 is the first GUI I ever used (the C64 was the most popular computer in the mid-80s; outselling even Microsoft DOS machines). My second GUI was the Workbench on the Commodore Amiga. I never even heard of a macintosh until circa 1990 (my first thought: "No color? No music? How dull!").
POINT: Just because YOUR life is apple-centric, does not mean the rest of us are.
I have always prefered to use affordable, yet fun computers. My childhood memories don't include visions of apples dancing around. They includes visions of Ataris and Commodores and Amigas.
The issue is not property (a poor choice of name).
The issue is labor.
I'll use an example to illustrate:
You are a good office worker, and your boss has tasked you with writing a 100-page document. You spend all week writing said document and when it's done, you hand it off to your boss. He says, "Thanks; beautiful work." You then go home and wait for your check.
The check never arrives. Meaning that you labored to produce a work, but never got paid for it.
Okay. Now imagine that your name was Stephen King, and that 100-page document you created was your latest short story, and that your bosses (the customers) took that work without ever paying you.
What they've stolen is not property. What they've stolen is another man's labor. Like the planatation owners did to slaves.
Bottom Line: I believe that the authors, writers, et cetera deserve to get paid for their labor. They don't get hourly wages like we do, but they do still deserve to be paid for the labor that they performed. BUYING the short story is how we customers pay them for that labor.
If you don't pay, you've stolen another man's labor without just compensation.
You've turned that man into your own personal slave (labor without payment).
>>>"No, the root of the problem is that telcos were given taxpayer subsidies to improve the infrastructure, failed to do it..."
.
This is a false statement. 10 years ago I was stuck at a measly 28 kbit/s. Now I can go much faster. Why? Because telcos HAVE made improvements:
- First they replaced the analog lines with digital, enabling approximately 40k connections for each average user (that was a big deal in the 90s).
- Then they relocated their switching stations closer to the home, thereby shortening the digital link, and providing cleaner 53k connections.
- Then they installed Internet routers at those central points, enabling both phone service & DSL service over the same line (3000 kilobit/s).
- Then they upgraded the lines AGAIN, offering DSL at 20,000 kilobit/s. - And now the Telcos are rolling out Fiber Optics.
What's this about the Telco's "doing nothing"? It's false; they've done a lot these last ten years. I have personally moved from 28 to 20,000 kilobits per second! Think about that; my connection is almost 1000 times faster and only costs me twice as much as my old 28k dialup.
Can I reasonably say there's no improvement? Sure, if I lie like a politician. But if I'm FAIR I have to say they have made HUGE improvements.
"telcos were given taxpayer subsidies to improve the infrastructure; failed to do it..." is a false statement. The telcos have made improved the infrastructure again and again and again.
You (and other people) keep trying to compare Internet Companies to Phone or Electric companies.
FLAW:
Those companies charge TIERS based upon usage. The phone company offers (typically) three tieres of usage: - 10 cents per call (metered) - $5 per month (100 call cap) - $15 per month (unlimited calling)
The electric company offers tiers as well: - residential (metered per use) - industrial #1 (100 megawatthour cap) - industrial #2 (200 megawatthour cap) - and so on.
But for some reason, when it comes to Internet company, you (and many others like you) don't want to allow them the same options. You keep insisting there should be: - one flat fee regardless of how much you use
.
That is not a reasonable solution. It is antithetical to how other Utility companies operate. A MORE REASONABLE solution would be: - $15 for minimal broadband (say 20 gigabytes) - $40 for standard broadband (100 gigabytes cap) - $80 for maximal broadband (unlimited)
THAT is a reasonable solution, and it follows the way that Phone Companies and Electric Companies have done things for YEARS. Metered services - different tiers - each tier designed for a different customer.
That's how Internet should work. Just like Electricity works. Just like Phones work.
>>>"I agree with you completely about letting competition set the prices,but as far as oversight of the monopolies? Never going to happen."
never?
There are many examples of the government doing exactly that! The gov't already oversees the (1) power company (2) local phone company (3) local cable company (4) local natural gas company. ------ In my area the state gov't is already overseeing Comcast television service in order to prevent abuse of its monopoly power; it would be a relatively simple matter to extend that oversight to the internet service (if Comcast holds a monopoly w/o competition).
>>>"The cable ISP and DSL ISP collude to provide about the same speed for about the same price."
I doubt that. Collusion/price-fixing is illegal. Just ask the record companies; the DOJ ordered them to refund money for price-fixing. Do you think Cable/DSL would repeat the same mistake?
No. Instead I suspect the reason the price is "approximately the same" is for a more fundamental reason: The costs are about the same. There's nothing sinister about that; it's just a simple fact that wires are not free & thus there will be a natural "lowest cost" limit on how cheaply Internet can be provided.
As for Comcast:
I think they are despicable. That's why I chose Verizon (dsl) and Netscape (dialup) instead. Verizon doesn't have caps, doesn't block access to Bittorrent, doesn't block Itunes. Verizon may cost the same, but they provide superior service.
And to reiterate:
I still maintain I should be paying more (say $80 a month) since I download tons of data easily exceeding 100 gigabytes per month. I feel somewhat guilty that I am paying the same amount as a casual user who only downloads 2-3 gigabytes per month.
I like that option of "paying more for more gigabytes" as a much better solution than the current options (blocking Itunes, blocking youtube.com, et cetera). And it's consistent with how other Utility companies apply billing (use more; pay more).
If the Democrats win (and I'm 99% certain they will)
how will that work into your "the Pentagon is controlling the vote" theory? (After all, the Pentagon would want the Republicans to win, not the Democrats.) I suppose you'll just silently slink away rather than admit your theory was "bunk".
ON-TOPIC:
I don't see how lasers could create voices inside people's heads. Laser is just light, and light would not penetrate the skull, so there'd be no effect on the human brain. This story sounds like the result of an On-Strike TV Writer with an overactive imagination creating his latest science fiction. i.e. Not reality.
That description reminds me of my electric toothbrush. The "stand" where I place the thing has no direct electrical connection. Instead the batteries are charged by proximity to the charger (using magnetic flux I believe).
This technology could be modified for 1-2 feet range, rather than just 1 inch. Although it would be inefficient. (And I'm not sure I want strong EM waves penetrating my body. Who knows what might happen to body cells being heated by power waves, even if only 1/2 a degree.)
- cloning arteries to replace the my current, aged, clogged-with-cholesterol pipes.
Also a new cloned heart and lungs would be good, but without clean pipes to carry the blood, they won't get the oxygen they need to survive. We need to be able to clone brand-new arteries! (Alternatively they could design little nanobots that "eat" cholesterol off the walls of arteries, and use said cholesterol for the bots' power sources, thereby making my pipes nice & clean again.) (Kinda like cleaning the sludge out of your engine's oil lines.)
The FCC allowed nudity on PBS. The FCC allowed nudity on NBC (Shindler's List). The FCC allowed the use of curse words during the airing of Ken Burn's "The War".
The FCC is strict, but not unreasonable and will allow the rules to be suspended for just causes. (Also the rules are looser for urban stations; often times I hear radio jocks swearing on evening radio.)
And finally, there's always cable. There's no FCC restriction on cable so you can send whatever television you want to send via cable channels.
You raise a good point. All this demonstrates is that Dynadot and other registrars hold too much power, and no restraint from exercising that power (i.e. they can pull the plug on a website's domain name whenever they feel like it).
Perhaps the Bill of Rights needs be extended, not just to Federal and State governments, but also corporations to guarantee free speech of corporate employees and customers. If the Bill of Rights (or similar document) were extended to corporations, Dynadot would not be able to pull anybody's domain name, cause then it would be violating constitutional law (the publisher's right to free press/speech), and Dynadot could be punished for criminal acts.
Oh, and before you discuss "corporation rights". Corporations are not people. Corporations are not entitled to rights like "free speech". Anymore than a rock or stone is entitled to human rights.
Only entities with souls (i.e. human beings) are "endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights". A corporation does not have a soul; it has no endowment of rights.
>>>"The split of Humans from the Apes pushed back by another 6 to 7 million years earlier than previously thought based on molecular genetics. The difference from the earlier estimate of around 5 to 6 million years is therefore over 100%"
Okay.
I know I'm not a mathematician, but isn't +1 million / 6 million only +16% difference? Where did you get +100%???
Oh this is cool! I could go on and on and on. While it's true some of these skills are still necessary for a few "elite" programmers or engineers, most of these skills are no longer used by the average user. To wit:
- what to do with a Commodore 64 when its cursor is blinking at you -----(everyone I know in my circle of friends would go "duh") -----(they have no clue how to navigate without icons or explorer) - how to write a simple basic program for your C=64: ----- 10 print "hello" ----- 20 goto 10 ----- RUN - LOAD "$" to get directory off my cassette drive (yes we used cassettes) - LOAD "*",8,1 to autoload & start most floppy disks - how to crate 16-color pictures that look good - how to program the SID to make music
- dir df0: to get a directory on a Commodore Amiga 500/2000 - the difference between Chip and Fast RAM - why it's a bad idea to multitask 2 programs off the same floppy -----(because the floppy will knock itself silly trying to read two tracks at the same time)
- ATDP 5601750 to dial on a rotary/pulse phone (ATDT for touchtone) - +++ to get your modem's attention so you can issue commands like: - ATH to hang up - how to create pretty pictures using ANSI - what is Zmodem, and why it's better to download files with Z rather than Xmodem - how long will it take to download a 3.5 inch floppy over 2.4k modem -----(long enough to eat supper and take a shower) -----(or watch the latest episode of Star Trek The Next Generation)
- how many hours you can squeeze on a T-180 VHS tape (9) - how many episodes of Quantum Leap if you remove the commercials (12) - how to repair your copy of Star Wars after the tape tears in half (scotchtape)
Most of the things I just listed were items known by "everyone" back in the 1980s. If you wanted to use a computer, you had to know the various commands and understand how/why things work.
Today people don't need to know command-line text. They can just point-and-click; it's become easy. And a lot of the things we used to need to know? It's essentially automatic now.
>>>>> Broadband, like dialup, is subsidized by the low use casual customers.
>>> In other words the casual user is paying too much.
Well...
That's true, but only because the "casual user" didn't do their research. People can still get $7.00 a month Netscape dialup accounts (unlimited usage). This is what I have for travel, and it works just fine for web-browsing. And there is a wide variety of other plans available:
- free - $7 for dialup - $15 for minimal broadband -~$40 for standard broadband -~$80 for maximal broadband
The various companies offer the users different options based upon how much bandwidth they think they will need. If a low-usage person pays more than what he/she needs, well then maybe they should downgrade & save some money. (IMHO).
Conclusion:
Per usual, it comes down to the casual, low-usage customer cheating him or herself. If they were wise, they'd get a cheap $7 dialup or $15 DSL connection, but because they didn't do their research, they end-up paying around $40 a month --- far far more than they need to pay.
And that's their problem, not mine. I pay my fair share ($80) for my habit.
In the States we have many methods of payment: - cash (obviously) - check (which is paper, but handled electronically) - check card (pulls money direct from the bank) - credit card (you don't pay now; you pay later on your monthly bill)
The check card and credit cards usually look identical, even though they operate differently. I personally don't use a check card because I'm afraid someone might steal it & empty my bank account. I prefer credit which I can always refuse to pay. (Example: Someone 3000 miles away stole my credit card number, bought $3000 at Walmart/$1000 at Sears, and I refused to pay it since I was obviously not on the west coast.)
Checks:
We still use paper, but once the paper arrives at the bank it gets scanned into a machine & from that point on, it's electronic. Money gets transfered over the wires. The paper check eventually makes its way back to the customer, and acts as a "receipt" to prove that you paid your Electric or Phone bill.
If I exaggerate what liberals do, it's only because I'm so frsutrated with them trying to run my life. The thing is: I'm not exaggerating... not intentionally. I'm simply reporting what they are doing.
As for pollution, I agree we should run clean cars rather than fill peoples' lungs with carcinogens, but that's no excuse to ban Diesels outright (reference: California's CARB decisions circa 2005). As Mercedes, Volkswagen, and Ford demonstrated to CARB, it's possible to build a SULEV diesel (i.e. as clean as a hybrid), and therefore there's no reason to arbitrarily label "diesels=dirty" and ban them. ----- CARB relented and now we have ULEV and SULEV diesels running the highways, but if CARB had not relented, we'd now have no diesels in either California or the Northeast.
And you're right.
The attempt to ban McDonalds hamburgers was dumb. Just last night while watching CNN, I heard that liberals in California now want to apply a "sin tax" to fatty foods (just as was done with cigarettes). Then about half an hour later, CNN revealed a new California law that, if passed, would ban obese patients from receiving gov't-funded health payments.
The liberals are good people; I like their goals but not their methods. They are really, really turning dictatorial. That's the antithesis of liberty, which is what this nation was founded to protect.
Slashdot Mirror
I did it.
Once.
It sounded like my Commodore Amiga's floppy was trying to pound its head to pieces, and of course it took three times as long to load two programs. After that I learned to run my programs out of the RAM: disk. In defense of myself, the whole multitasking thing was new back then. We users had to learn as we went.
Of course, isn't that how Windows operates today? Multiple programs often try to access the hard drive at the same time, causing the head to make lots of noise. As example, try running Vista on a 256 megabyte machine (and just listen to the hard drive grind). Ugh.
>>>"You seem to think that there is a difference..."
;-)
Well in that case:
Why does the Pentagon need to control who wins the election, if there's no difference? They would not need to control anything, since it would not matter who won.
>>>"The other problem is that I am 99% sure that Comcast wouldn't lower rates for the light users, it would keep them the same and hike up rates for users they arbitrarily define as 'heavy"
No Comcast would not lower rates.
(Just as they don't offer a la carte.)
Fortunately other competitors do offer low rates ($15) for casual users. Isn't competition wonderful?
>>>"And since they have no competition to speak of, they will do so."
You don't have DSL in your area? Or Dish satellite internet? Or wireless internet? If you have any of those, you can't really say there's "no competition".
>>>" THAT WAS HOW IT WAS REPRESENTED TO ME"
Yes.
Me too.
What I didn't make clear is that future advertising should state explicitly that there's a ~100 gigabyte cap on $40 service. They comcasts of this world need to be open about the terms.
One one hand, I agree with you.
On the other hand, the world is filled with pirates who will not just make a photocopy to go backpacking - they will make 1,000 copies to share with friends. That's what DRM is supposed to prevent from happening.
Unfortunately the way DRM is designed now, it doesn't just punish pirates.
It also punishes the innocent user trying to copy his Stephen King
book over to an Ipod or CD or email. Thus DRM is too heavy-handed.
There's nothing wrong with the concept of DRM - just the nutjobs in the RIAA who insist that even legal users may not copy their goods over to other devices. The RIAA needs to stop being so paranoid, and adjust the DRM so that it will allow reasonable use (like letting each user have 5 copies of his book, rather than just 1 copy).
Yeah that does seem silly. I would describe a corporation as a "Dictatorship" or "Oligarchy" wherein just the CEO or Board of Directors have a voice, and the employees underneath have none (they must follow the corporate dictates, or else be fired).
I don't think the courts should be granting dictatorships/oligarchies the same legal protections as a person. On the contrary, such dictatorial arrangements that seek to diminish the employee to the level of a "serf" should have no legal status whatsoever. For example, the corporation may speak, but that speech may be revoked, because they are non-free, non-democratic organizations.
Corporations should have revocable privileges, not rights.
FLAW:
There wasn't a court order. The website is still there; it still is available. The only thing that happened was the a Corporate Entity decided to yank the domain name.
Because corporations can do that. They have the money & the power. Hence the need for some kind of "Bill of Rights" that limits that corporate power.
Oh brother.
Well the U.S. Supreme Court is, like all courts, required to enforce the laws as written. That means it's required to enforce the Constitution since that is the Supreme Law. It has not done a perfect job, but being *independent* from the control of the Congress/Executive, has allowed it to make some good strong decisions based purely on *law* and not random whims.
(Yes I know the justices are appointed by the president, but history has shown once a justice is in power, he/she often does the opposite of what the president wanted. Once the justice is in place, nobody can exert control over him. His master is the Law, and nothing but the Law, as it should be.)
Thomas Jefferson argued very eloquently, as you did, that the U.S.S.C. is not the final arbitrator. He even suggested State Nullification as an alternative (unconstitutional laws would not be enforced by the state governors).
It didn't work.
If a genius like Jefferson could not find a better solution than the U.S.S.C., then I don't feel qualified to propose anything better. Your idea of "jury nullification" only works if you are dealing with an educated people, and NONE of the founders considered "the people" to be intelligent enough to do that job. (As Winston Churchill said, "The strongest argument against democracy is a 5-minute talk with an average voter." Which is why we have Republics, and not Democracies.)
I certainly would not want my jury, mostly composed of high school grads that can barely read/write, to decide whether or not the police violated my right to privacy when they took my computer filled with naked photographs. I'd likely get a bunch of Christians and Muslims who would think I should be "sentenced to burn in hell" via an electric chair. (Never mind the constitutional protection of freedom of press/speech/home/et cetera.)
No.
Such weighty decisions should be left in the hands of an educated, above-average intelligent body. Namely the State Legislatures, the U.S. Congress, and the Superior/Supreme Courts (especially the latter). Not some joe blow dumbass who lacked enough intelligence to get off jury duty.
A couple thought:
,8 == use drive 8 (disk drive). 9 == use drive 9. And so on.
,1 is optional. Without it, the program loads directly to BASIC, and many programs will work just fine with LOAD "*",8
(1) The start key on the 800XL probably issued the same command (LOAD "*") but it was automatic, rather than typed. The Commodore 64, being developed earlier, also included an autoload function, but it autoloaded off the cassette drive (the most common device in 1982).
(2)(a) LOAD "*" is nothing exotic. * is just a wildcard that says load the first program. I'm sure you're familiar with wildcards. Right? (Maybe this is another thing that today's users have forgotten.)
(2)(b)
(2)(c)
With the 1, it tells the C64 to dump the operating system and allows the program to fill-up as much space as possible (thus enabling the C64 to use all 64 kilobytes of space for the user application) (Atari800 programs were limited to only 48(?)k of RAM). The first byte in the C64 file usually specified where in memory it should reside.
(3) The drives were not slow once you loaded them with fast-loading software. After that was done, the C64 drives ran faster than did the Atari drives. As example, Microprose's Red Storm Rising loads in just 20 seconds time, thanks to its fast loader.
(4) Commodore 64 also had better sound with triangle and sawtooth generators (atari had none), thus enabling the C64 to sound like various instruments rather than like a touchtone phone. The C64's SID chip still remains popular today, used by artists like Timbaland in their latest over-the-radio creations.
Well...
In the 1970s I never even heard of Apple II. My first "love" was an Atari 400. Commodore PET was also popular around that same timeframe.
Sony Walkman is the first MP3 player I ever heard of. I don't know (or care) which was first. What I do know is that I'll never buy an ipod - what an overpriced luxury! (Like buying a Lexus, when all you really need is a Toyota.) My current MP3 player is a $10 gadget from best buy. Works great!
A popular GUI before Macs? Hmmm. GEOS on my Commodore 64 is the first GUI I ever used (the C64 was the most popular computer in the mid-80s; outselling even Microsoft DOS machines). My second GUI was the Workbench on the Commodore Amiga. I never even heard of a macintosh until circa 1990 (my first thought: "No color? No music? How dull!").
POINT:
Just because YOUR life is apple-centric,
does not mean the rest of us are.
I have always prefered to use affordable, yet fun computers. My childhood memories don't include visions of apples dancing around. They includes visions of Ataris and Commodores and Amigas.
The issue is not property (a poor choice of name).
The issue is labor.
I'll use an example to illustrate:
You are a good office worker, and your boss has tasked you with writing a 100-page document. You spend all week writing said document and when it's done, you hand it off to your boss. He says, "Thanks; beautiful work." You then go home and wait for your check.
The check never arrives.
Meaning that you labored to produce a work,
but never got paid for it.
Okay. Now imagine that your name was Stephen King, and that 100-page document you created was your latest short story, and that your bosses (the customers) took that work without ever paying you.
What they've stolen is not property.
What they've stolen is another man's labor.
Like the planatation owners did to slaves.
Bottom Line: I believe that the authors, writers, et cetera deserve to get paid for their labor. They don't get hourly wages like we do, but they do still deserve to be paid for the labor that they performed. BUYING the short story is how we customers pay them for that labor.
If you don't pay, you've stolen another man's labor without just compensation.
You've turned that man into your own personal slave (labor without payment).
>>>"No, the root of the problem is that telcos were given taxpayer subsidies to improve the infrastructure, failed to do it..."
.
This is a false statement. 10 years ago I was stuck at a measly 28 kbit/s. Now I can go much faster. Why? Because telcos HAVE made improvements:
- First they replaced the analog lines with digital, enabling approximately 40k connections for each average user (that was a big deal in the 90s).
- Then they relocated their switching stations closer to the home, thereby shortening the digital link, and providing cleaner 53k connections.
- Then they installed Internet routers at those central points, enabling both phone service & DSL service over the same line (3000 kilobit/s).
- Then they upgraded the lines AGAIN, offering DSL at 20,000 kilobit/s.
- And now the Telcos are rolling out Fiber Optics.
What's this about the Telco's "doing nothing"? It's false; they've done a lot these last ten years. I have personally moved from 28 to 20,000 kilobits per second! Think about that; my connection is almost 1000 times faster and only costs me twice as much as my old 28k dialup.
Can I reasonably say there's no improvement?
Sure, if I lie like a politician.
But if I'm FAIR I have to say they have made HUGE improvements.
"telcos were given taxpayer subsidies to improve the infrastructure; failed to do it..." is a false statement. The telcos have made improved the infrastructure again and again and again.
You (and other people) keep trying to compare Internet Companies to Phone or Electric companies.
FLAW:
Those companies charge TIERS based upon usage. The phone company offers (typically) three tieres of usage:
- 10 cents per call (metered)
- $5 per month (100 call cap)
- $15 per month (unlimited calling)
The electric company offers tiers as well:
- residential (metered per use)
- industrial #1 (100 megawatthour cap)
- industrial #2 (200 megawatthour cap)
- and so on.
But for some reason, when it comes to Internet company, you (and many others like you) don't want to allow them the same options. You keep insisting there should be:
- one flat fee regardless of how much you use
.
That is not a reasonable solution. It is antithetical to how other Utility companies operate. A MORE REASONABLE solution would be:
- $15 for minimal broadband (say 20 gigabytes)
- $40 for standard broadband (100 gigabytes cap)
- $80 for maximal broadband (unlimited)
THAT is a reasonable solution, and it follows the way that Phone Companies and Electric Companies have done things for YEARS. Metered services - different tiers - each tier designed for a different customer.
That's how Internet should work.
Just like Electricity works.
Just like Phones work.
>>>"I agree with you completely about letting competition set the prices,but as far as oversight of the monopolies? Never going to happen."
never?
There are many examples of the government doing exactly that! The gov't already oversees the (1) power company (2) local phone company (3) local cable company (4) local natural gas company. ------ In my area the state gov't is already overseeing Comcast television service in order to prevent abuse of its monopoly power; it would be a relatively simple matter to extend that oversight to the internet service (if Comcast holds a monopoly w/o competition).
>>>"The cable ISP and DSL ISP collude to provide about the same speed for about the same price."
I doubt that.
Collusion/price-fixing is illegal.
Just ask the record companies;
the DOJ ordered them to refund money for price-fixing.
Do you think Cable/DSL would repeat the same mistake?
No. Instead I suspect the reason the price is "approximately the same" is for a more fundamental reason: The costs are about the same. There's nothing sinister about that; it's just a simple fact that wires are not free & thus there will be a natural "lowest cost" limit on how cheaply Internet can be provided.
As for Comcast:
I think they are despicable. That's why I chose Verizon (dsl) and Netscape (dialup) instead. Verizon doesn't have caps, doesn't block access to Bittorrent, doesn't block Itunes. Verizon may cost the same, but they provide superior service.
And to reiterate:
I still maintain I should be paying more (say $80 a month) since I download tons of data easily exceeding 100 gigabytes per month. I feel somewhat guilty that I am paying the same amount as a casual user who only downloads 2-3 gigabytes per month.
I like that option of "paying more for more gigabytes" as a much better solution than the current options (blocking Itunes, blocking youtube.com, et cetera). And it's consistent with how other Utility companies apply billing (use more; pay more).
If the Democrats win
(and I'm 99% certain they will)
how will that work into your "the Pentagon is controlling the vote" theory? (After all, the Pentagon would want the Republicans to win, not the Democrats.) I suppose you'll just silently slink away rather than admit your theory was "bunk".
ON-TOPIC:
I don't see how lasers could create voices inside people's heads. Laser is just light, and light would not penetrate the skull, so there'd be no effect on the human brain. This story sounds like the result of an On-Strike TV Writer with an overactive imagination creating his latest science fiction. i.e. Not reality.
That description reminds me of my electric toothbrush. The "stand" where I place the thing has no direct electrical connection. Instead the batteries are charged by proximity to the charger (using magnetic flux I believe).
This technology could be modified for 1-2 feet range, rather than just 1 inch. Although it would be inefficient. (And I'm not sure I want strong EM waves penetrating my body. Who knows what might happen to body cells being heated by power waves, even if only 1/2 a degree.)
The only technology I care about:
- cloning arteries to replace the my current, aged, clogged-with-cholesterol pipes.
Also a new cloned heart and lungs would be good, but without clean pipes to carry the blood, they won't get the oxygen they need to survive. We need to be able to clone brand-new arteries! (Alternatively they could design little nanobots that "eat" cholesterol off the walls of arteries, and use said cholesterol for the bots' power sources, thereby making my pipes nice & clean again.) (Kinda like cleaning the sludge out of your engine's oil lines.)
The FCC allowed nudity on PBS. The FCC allowed nudity on NBC (Shindler's List). The FCC allowed the use of curse words during the airing of Ken Burn's "The War".
The FCC is strict, but not unreasonable and will allow the rules to be suspended for just causes. (Also the rules are looser for urban stations; often times I hear radio jocks swearing on evening radio.)
And finally, there's always cable. There's no FCC restriction on cable so you can send whatever television you want to send via cable channels.
You raise a good point. All this demonstrates is that Dynadot and other registrars hold too much power, and no restraint from exercising that power (i.e. they can pull the plug on a website's domain name whenever they feel like it).
Perhaps the Bill of Rights needs be extended, not just to Federal and State governments, but also corporations to guarantee free speech of corporate employees and customers. If the Bill of Rights (or similar document) were extended to corporations, Dynadot would not be able to pull anybody's domain name, cause then it would be violating constitutional law (the publisher's right to free press/speech), and Dynadot could be punished for criminal acts.
Oh, and before you discuss "corporation rights".
Corporations are not people.
Corporations are not entitled to rights like "free speech".
Anymore than a rock or stone is entitled to human rights.
Only entities with souls (i.e. human beings) are "endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights". A corporation does not have a soul; it has no endowment of rights.
>>>"The split of Humans from the Apes pushed back by another 6 to 7 million years earlier than previously thought based on molecular genetics. The difference from the earlier estimate of around 5 to 6 million years is therefore over 100%"
Okay.
I know I'm not a mathematician, but isn't +1 million / 6 million only +16% difference? Where did you get +100%???
Oh this is cool! I could go on and on and on. While it's true some of these skills are still necessary for a few "elite" programmers or engineers, most of these skills are no longer used by the average user. To wit:
- what to do with a Commodore 64 when its cursor is blinking at you
-----(everyone I know in my circle of friends would go "duh")
-----(they have no clue how to navigate without icons or explorer)
- how to write a simple basic program for your C=64:
----- 10 print "hello"
----- 20 goto 10
----- RUN
- LOAD "$" to get directory off my cassette drive (yes we used cassettes)
- LOAD "*",8,1 to autoload & start most floppy disks
- how to crate 16-color pictures that look good
- how to program the SID to make music
- dir df0: to get a directory on a Commodore Amiga 500/2000
- the difference between Chip and Fast RAM
- why it's a bad idea to multitask 2 programs off the same floppy
-----(because the floppy will knock itself silly trying to read two tracks at the same time)
- ATDP 5601750 to dial on a rotary/pulse phone (ATDT for touchtone)
- +++ to get your modem's attention so you can issue commands like:
- ATH to hang up
- how to create pretty pictures using ANSI
- what is Zmodem, and why it's better to download files with Z rather than Xmodem
- how long will it take to download a 3.5 inch floppy over 2.4k modem
-----(long enough to eat supper and take a shower)
-----(or watch the latest episode of Star Trek The Next Generation)
- how many hours you can squeeze on a T-180 VHS tape (9)
- how many episodes of Quantum Leap if you remove the commercials (12)
- how to repair your copy of Star Wars after the tape tears in half (scotchtape)
Most of the things I just listed were items known by "everyone" back in the 1980s. If you wanted to use a computer, you had to know the various commands and understand how/why things work.
Today people don't need to know command-line text.
They can just point-and-click; it's become easy.
And a lot of the things we used to need to know?
It's essentially automatic now.
>>>>> Broadband, like dialup, is subsidized by the low use casual customers.
>>> In other words the casual user is paying too much.
Well...
That's true, but only because the "casual user" didn't do their research. People can still get $7.00 a month Netscape dialup accounts (unlimited usage). This is what I have for travel, and it works just fine for web-browsing. And there is a wide variety of other plans available:
- free
- $7 for dialup
- $15 for minimal broadband
-~$40 for standard broadband
-~$80 for maximal broadband
The various companies offer the users different options based upon how much bandwidth they think they will need. If a low-usage person pays more than what he/she needs, well then maybe they should downgrade & save some money. (IMHO).
Conclusion:
Per usual, it comes down to the casual, low-usage customer cheating him or herself. If they were wise, they'd get a cheap $7 dialup or $15 DSL connection, but because they didn't do their research, they end-up paying around $40 a month --- far far more than they need to pay.
And that's their problem, not mine.
I pay my fair share ($80) for my habit.
In the States we have many methods of payment:
- cash (obviously)
- check (which is paper, but handled electronically)
- check card (pulls money direct from the bank)
- credit card (you don't pay now; you pay later on your monthly bill)
The check card and credit cards usually look identical, even though they operate differently. I personally don't use a check card because I'm afraid someone might steal it & empty my bank account. I prefer credit which I can always refuse to pay. (Example: Someone 3000 miles away stole my credit card number, bought $3000 at Walmart/$1000 at Sears, and I refused to pay it since I was obviously not on the west coast.)
Checks:
We still use paper, but once the paper arrives at the bank it gets scanned into a machine & from that point on, it's electronic. Money gets transfered over the wires. The paper check eventually makes its way back to the customer, and acts as a "receipt" to prove that you paid your Electric or Phone bill.
If I exaggerate what liberals do, it's only because I'm so frsutrated with them trying to run my life. The thing is: I'm not exaggerating... not intentionally. I'm simply reporting what they are doing.
As for pollution, I agree we should run clean cars rather than fill peoples' lungs with carcinogens, but that's no excuse to ban Diesels outright (reference: California's CARB decisions circa 2005). As Mercedes, Volkswagen, and Ford demonstrated to CARB, it's possible to build a SULEV diesel (i.e. as clean as a hybrid), and therefore there's no reason to arbitrarily label "diesels=dirty" and ban them. ----- CARB relented and now we have ULEV and SULEV diesels running the highways, but if CARB had not relented, we'd now have no diesels in either California or the Northeast.
And you're right.
The attempt to ban McDonalds hamburgers was dumb. Just last night while watching CNN, I heard that liberals in California now want to apply a "sin tax" to fatty foods (just as was done with cigarettes). Then about half an hour later, CNN revealed a new California law that, if passed, would ban obese patients from receiving gov't-funded health payments.
The liberals are good people; I like their goals but not their methods.
They are really, really turning dictatorial.
That's the antithesis of liberty, which is what this nation was founded to protect.