And I love how the Linux fanbois on/. will drown out all other thought. Linux is not as superior as you all would have the world believe. Sure, Windows has a crapload of problems and MS is just an evil company - and we all love making jokes about Sweaty Steve... but seriously - Linux on the Desktop still has a LONG way to go before it can really permeate the mainstream userbase. One of the biggest reasons? Linux still requires some level of computing competence to use. Most users - especially non-tech-industry business users - avoid this competence like they flock to MBA alumni get-togethers.
I'm kinda getting tired of the/. irrationality when it comes to the OS wars. Windows has a lot of suck wrapped up in it, we can all agree - but Linux isn't ready to be the desktop alternative yet either. It's just not.
IMHO, the OP wasn't so much trolling as he was just wrong. For dedicated machinery like a POS box, or a mail gateway, or a DNS server, or anything where you're locking the box down and making it perform specific functions, there's probably no better option than Linux. But for a multi-use, end-user machine that is being used by anyone for anything, Linux just isn't there yet.
My initial impression was also that USEI was a side-car company created by 3Com in the interest of trolling some of their old patents. However, after reading the following blog, I'm not as convinced. USEI could very well just be the slimy, independent patent troll it appears to be on the surface.
http://nerdtwilight.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/3com-not-affiliated-with-u-s-ethernet-innovations/
Oh, and Beck's only been on the radio nationally since 2002, only been a published author since 2003, and only been on television since 2006 - so there's no way this joke is more than 7 years old.:P
but when a lawmaking apparatus is so aloof that it deems most of the people who make up a society unfit to be part of that society, that society is likely very sick in other respects as well.
Is it the society that is sick, or the lawmaking apparatus? I definitely consider the majority of the US Congress fairly mentally ill...;)
Yeah, but where can I find free and secure alternatives to Windows that run the applications I want to run? Specifically, I'm currently only using my home computer for - Internet, Email, and Gaming. The first two, okay. But where can I find this free, secure OS that will run both Aion and NBA 2K10 for me? I'm not asking to be completely sarcastic - I actually would consider moving away from Windows if I could find an alternative for gamers... It's getting here, slowly. Didn't Valve recently say they'd make their games for Linux?
I can agree that avoiding anxiety and seeking pleasure are not fundamentally the same, and do have distinctions that come into play. I am mainly grouping them into a single thought/concept to convey the idea that I believe people are doing something for, ultimately, a goal to attain a certain "better" feeling about themselves or for themselves, rather than for a philosophical "good" or "evil" driver.
But the biggest, IMHO, is this: have you taken a look around and noticed how many people are doing things that are totally self-destructive and making them miserable, and yet they can't stop?
Yes, I have and there are either two cases there: 1. They are physically or psychologically addicted beyond their control, which discounts them from being included because it is not their choice, or 2. they are continuing self-destructive behavior because it still makes them feel good.
Second, I do not discount anxiety. What you discount is why they act on their anxiety. You discount the fact that they are acting on their anxiety to relieve said anxiety - ergo, they are doing it to make themselves feel better.
I will concede that perhaps in the terseness in the vocabulary, it's hard to convey the entire concept of feeling better, satisfaction, pleasure, etc into one cohesive thought. But that, in the end, is the driver.
So while you think there are "problems" with my philosophy on this, I find significant problems with yours. As I said in my original post, I'm happy to agree to disagree with you on this, and think nothing less of you for it.
Well, I was just making a joke - but this discussion does kinda relate back to a personal philosophy of mine: People never do anything for anything other than personal satisfaction. Even when they do things that actually pain them in the interest of others and not themselves - it's ultimately done because they believe that doing so is the thing they should do, and that, in turn, brings them personal satisfaction that they've done the right thing. You're welcome to believe otherwise, but my own opinion is unlikely to change.:)
I see - I was in Middletown, and then later in Maineville. The pricing you mention sounds about like what it was when I was there 5 years ago, adjusted for time and economy. And it still sounds too expensive for the speeds.:)
And no - getting better pricing on internet services by being bundled in with telephone or cable television service does NOT count toward better pricing. I have a cell phone, and don't want cable television.
What city do you live in? I live in Marina Del Rey, on the west side of Los Angeles. I have 2 options for broadband access: DSL and TimeWarner cable. TimeWarner charges $39.99/mo for "up to 10mb" internet by itself (http://order.timewarnercable.com/OfferList.aspx). I have switched over to BelAirInternet DSL services, because they offer me 5x5 DSL for $45/mo, which was the best price around for DSL. Verizon, at my old place in Venice, CA (2 miles from where I live now) could only offer me 768k DSL on their shoddy 20-year-old copper, but were totally willing to charge me $50/mo for that.
I have had the same pricing experiences in Cincinnati, Ohio. So please, show me what city you're getting better pricing in.
If your computer has been compromised in this fashion, you've already lost. For you car enthusiasts, it's like adding additional locks to the car doors -- it doesn't help if the windows (haha) are already broken.
What's the computer equivalent of the "This car protected by Smith & Wesson" bumper sticker?
A Penguin.
Seriously. Because it doesn't matter what OS the computer is running, no matter how badass its security model is, when you have PHB's at the keyboard. Same for the Smith & Wesson: no matter how badass the gun is, that security is only as good as the guy with his finger on the trigger.
In my distinction between ethics and morals, I look more at their source than their effect. Meaning, I take ethics to be a set of rules or ideas that require thought and logical justification which make up a framework of how we would like behavior to be. Morals, on the other hand, I take to be more like the universal truths you mention. I consider morals to be fundamental right and wrong concepts that we accept as given. Then, going on from there, many of the morals people accept as "given" are given to them by their chosen organized religion, and yes - those morals often do vary from religion to religion and cannot be considered universal truths, though they are accepted as morals because there is no logic or justification (it may be possible to logically justify a moral, however it may not be and need not be).
For example, hypothetically speaking, I might consider killing to be morally wrong, but I could also accept that doing so might be ethically right in some situations. Or one religion may call it morally wrong to have sex out of wedlock while another may not. These are morals because they are taken on faith without thought or justification - the religion simply says so and it's believed. But you certainly cannot say that sex out of wedlock is a universal truth.
That, sir, is a highly insightful post and I'd mod it so if I had points. I only say I don't know that I agree the Republicans will take longer to destroy the country. They have done a fairly remarkable job in the last 8 years heading us down a much worse path than we were on under Clinton. In fact, outside of Clinton we've had a pretty constant Republican administration in office since the late 70s. Incidentally, the average American male's income has stagnated at roughly $40k/yr in terms of 2006 dollars. Women's incomes have slowly risen to be more comparable (but not completely) over that time, only due to women's movements for equality. The problem is that while I do tend to agree more with Republican fiscal policy - I have yet to see a Republican in office who actually walks that walk. So while I would agree in principal that Republican philosophy would take longer to destroy the democracy than a Democratic one - in reality they're both equally adept at running us straight into the ground.
What makes politics difficult for the critical thinking is the density of ethical questions surrounding every subject.
Which is complicated further by the fact that many people confuse ethical issues with moral issues. And then further confuse a single religion's stance on an issue as "THE" only right moral, and therefore ethical, stance to take on the subject.
The Democratic platform is constitutionally questionable - correct. But so was the Republican one of the last administration. What sucks in discussing politics is that people still believe there's really a difference between the Republicans and Democrats that are actually in office.
The current crop of Republicans AND Democrats in office are all self-interested, career politicians with no real interest in doing anything other than keeping themselves in power. There is no real difference in how the country is run under Democrat or Republican rule; neither understand the world of today. The US has not moved forward, economically, since 1970. The only thing the US has done since then is accumulate debt and manipulate accounting rules so that the debt looks like a product export to strengthen our GDP.
Took me a little while (post lunch coma) to figure out what the table is showing. The one thing I did find interesting is that it looks like single-income families (spouse not in workforce or filing single) are making today roughly what they were making in the late 70s, in terms of 2006 dollars as the reference. Maybe Reaganomics didn't work after all? (Hopefully I didn't table read fail, too. See above post lunch coma:) )
I would posit that patenting your research for commercial gain should exempt said research from Nobel Prize eligibility.. but that's just me. In Nobel's will, it's pretty clear his award was meant to encourage the advancement of mankind - not the advancement of a company's balance sheet. The two motives are pretty exclusive. Either you've done the research and are making it publicly available to all of mankind - or you are keeping it for yourself and only offering the benefits of the research to the select individuals who can afford it. If you're patenting it, your motive is profit.
Slashdot Mirror
And I love how the Linux fanbois on /. will drown out all other thought. Linux is not as superior as you all would have the world believe. Sure, Windows has a crapload of problems and MS is just an evil company - and we all love making jokes about Sweaty Steve... but seriously - Linux on the Desktop still has a LONG way to go before it can really permeate the mainstream userbase. One of the biggest reasons? Linux still requires some level of computing competence to use. Most users - especially non-tech-industry business users - avoid this competence like they flock to MBA alumni get-togethers.
/. irrationality when it comes to the OS wars. Windows has a lot of suck wrapped up in it, we can all agree - but Linux isn't ready to be the desktop alternative yet either. It's just not.
I'm kinda getting tired of the
IMHO, the OP wasn't so much trolling as he was just wrong. For dedicated machinery like a POS box, or a mail gateway, or a DNS server, or anything where you're locking the box down and making it perform specific functions, there's probably no better option than Linux. But for a multi-use, end-user machine that is being used by anyone for anything, Linux just isn't there yet.
My initial impression was also that USEI was a side-car company created by 3Com in the interest of trolling some of their old patents. However, after reading the following blog, I'm not as convinced. USEI could very well just be the slimy, independent patent troll it appears to be on the surface. http://nerdtwilight.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/3com-not-affiliated-with-u-s-ethernet-innovations/
Oh, and Beck's only been on the radio nationally since 2002, only been a published author since 2003, and only been on television since 2006 - so there's no way this joke is more than 7 years old. :P
It's never not funny to insult or make a joke at the expense of racist, fear-mongering bigots.
"Authority to govern comes from the consent of the governed"
Ah, I thought it came from strange women lying in ponds distributing swords.
Oh, but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!
but when a lawmaking apparatus is so aloof that it deems most of the people who make up a society unfit to be part of that society, that society is likely very sick in other respects as well.
Is it the society that is sick, or the lawmaking apparatus? I definitely consider the majority of the US Congress fairly mentally ill... ;)
Oh come on, mods.. that was funny!
Yeah, but where can I find free and secure alternatives to Windows that run the applications I want to run? Specifically, I'm currently only using my home computer for - Internet, Email, and Gaming. The first two, okay. But where can I find this free, secure OS that will run both Aion and NBA 2K10 for me? I'm not asking to be completely sarcastic - I actually would consider moving away from Windows if I could find an alternative for gamers... It's getting here, slowly. Didn't Valve recently say they'd make their games for Linux?
I can agree that avoiding anxiety and seeking pleasure are not fundamentally the same, and do have distinctions that come into play. I am mainly grouping them into a single thought/concept to convey the idea that I believe people are doing something for, ultimately, a goal to attain a certain "better" feeling about themselves or for themselves, rather than for a philosophical "good" or "evil" driver.
But the biggest, IMHO, is this: have you taken a look around and noticed how many people are doing things that are totally self-destructive and making them miserable, and yet they can't stop?
Yes, I have and there are either two cases there: 1. They are physically or psychologically addicted beyond their control, which discounts them from being included because it is not their choice, or 2. they are continuing self-destructive behavior because it still makes them feel good.
Second, I do not discount anxiety. What you discount is why they act on their anxiety. You discount the fact that they are acting on their anxiety to relieve said anxiety - ergo, they are doing it to make themselves feel better.
I will concede that perhaps in the terseness in the vocabulary, it's hard to convey the entire concept of feeling better, satisfaction, pleasure, etc into one cohesive thought. But that, in the end, is the driver. So while you think there are "problems" with my philosophy on this, I find significant problems with yours. As I said in my original post, I'm happy to agree to disagree with you on this, and think nothing less of you for it.
Well, I was just making a joke - but this discussion does kinda relate back to a personal philosophy of mine: People never do anything for anything other than personal satisfaction. Even when they do things that actually pain them in the interest of others and not themselves - it's ultimately done because they believe that doing so is the thing they should do, and that, in turn, brings them personal satisfaction that they've done the right thing. You're welcome to believe otherwise, but my own opinion is unlikely to change. :)
I see - I was in Middletown, and then later in Maineville. The pricing you mention sounds about like what it was when I was there 5 years ago, adjusted for time and economy. And it still sounds too expensive for the speeds. :)
And no - getting better pricing on internet services by being bundled in with telephone or cable television service does NOT count toward better pricing. I have a cell phone, and don't want cable television.
What city do you live in? I live in Marina Del Rey, on the west side of Los Angeles. I have 2 options for broadband access: DSL and TimeWarner cable. TimeWarner charges $39.99/mo for "up to 10mb" internet by itself (http://order.timewarnercable.com/OfferList.aspx). I have switched over to BelAirInternet DSL services, because they offer me 5x5 DSL for $45/mo, which was the best price around for DSL. Verizon, at my old place in Venice, CA (2 miles from where I live now) could only offer me 768k DSL on their shoddy 20-year-old copper, but were totally willing to charge me $50/mo for that. I have had the same pricing experiences in Cincinnati, Ohio. So please, show me what city you're getting better pricing in.
Are you sure a company ever does anything, for _our_ best interests?
There, FIFY. =)
outright mass file deletion would be more suspect in my book
...probably why they went with file corruption. Duh!~ ;)
If your computer has been compromised in this fashion, you've already lost. For you car enthusiasts, it's like adding additional locks to the car doors -- it doesn't help if the windows (haha) are already broken.
What's the computer equivalent of the "This car protected by Smith & Wesson" bumper sticker?
A Penguin.
Seriously. Because it doesn't matter what OS the computer is running, no matter how badass its security model is, when you have PHB's at the keyboard. Same for the Smith & Wesson: no matter how badass the gun is, that security is only as good as the guy with his finger on the trigger.
In my distinction between ethics and morals, I look more at their source than their effect. Meaning, I take ethics to be a set of rules or ideas that require thought and logical justification which make up a framework of how we would like behavior to be. Morals, on the other hand, I take to be more like the universal truths you mention. I consider morals to be fundamental right and wrong concepts that we accept as given. Then, going on from there, many of the morals people accept as "given" are given to them by their chosen organized religion, and yes - those morals often do vary from religion to religion and cannot be considered universal truths, though they are accepted as morals because there is no logic or justification (it may be possible to logically justify a moral, however it may not be and need not be).
For example, hypothetically speaking, I might consider killing to be morally wrong, but I could also accept that doing so might be ethically right in some situations. Or one religion may call it morally wrong to have sex out of wedlock while another may not. These are morals because they are taken on faith without thought or justification - the religion simply says so and it's believed. But you certainly cannot say that sex out of wedlock is a universal truth.
That, sir, is a highly insightful post and I'd mod it so if I had points. I only say I don't know that I agree the Republicans will take longer to destroy the country. They have done a fairly remarkable job in the last 8 years heading us down a much worse path than we were on under Clinton. In fact, outside of Clinton we've had a pretty constant Republican administration in office since the late 70s. Incidentally, the average American male's income has stagnated at roughly $40k/yr in terms of 2006 dollars. Women's incomes have slowly risen to be more comparable (but not completely) over that time, only due to women's movements for equality. The problem is that while I do tend to agree more with Republican fiscal policy - I have yet to see a Republican in office who actually walks that walk. So while I would agree in principal that Republican philosophy would take longer to destroy the democracy than a Democratic one - in reality they're both equally adept at running us straight into the ground.
What makes politics difficult for the critical thinking is the density of ethical questions surrounding every subject.
Which is complicated further by the fact that many people confuse ethical issues with moral issues. And then further confuse a single religion's stance on an issue as "THE" only right moral, and therefore ethical, stance to take on the subject.
The Democratic platform is constitutionally questionable - correct. But so was the Republican one of the last administration. What sucks in discussing politics is that people still believe there's really a difference between the Republicans and Democrats that are actually in office.
The current crop of Republicans AND Democrats in office are all self-interested, career politicians with no real interest in doing anything other than keeping themselves in power. There is no real difference in how the country is run under Democrat or Republican rule; neither understand the world of today. The US has not moved forward, economically, since 1970. The only thing the US has done since then is accumulate debt and manipulate accounting rules so that the debt looks like a product export to strengthen our GDP.
Took me a little while (post lunch coma) to figure out what the table is showing. The one thing I did find interesting is that it looks like single-income families (spouse not in workforce or filing single) are making today roughly what they were making in the late 70s, in terms of 2006 dollars as the reference. Maybe Reaganomics didn't work after all? (Hopefully I didn't table read fail, too. See above post lunch coma :) )
I would posit that patenting your research for commercial gain should exempt said research from Nobel Prize eligibility.. but that's just me. In Nobel's will, it's pretty clear his award was meant to encourage the advancement of mankind - not the advancement of a company's balance sheet. The two motives are pretty exclusive. Either you've done the research and are making it publicly available to all of mankind - or you are keeping it for yourself and only offering the benefits of the research to the select individuals who can afford it. If you're patenting it, your motive is profit.
... who first read this headline as, "Hershey Releases First Images of Milky Way" and wondered what was so interesting about a new candy bar?