Until you've tried Second Life, and by tried I mean played it for more than a month, I don't think you should be being so sarcastic about the ability to change your form. I'm not interested in it. Too much hype for too little. There's too much free content on the net to convince me I need a virtual avatar to access content artificially crammed together.
As far as the money aspect goes, I'm just saying making $10 for valued labor is nothing to brag about. I suppose if you're doing it for kicks that's a minor perk, but the money really is pitiful.
I had a family member who died from a long term illness who was mostly confined to her bed. The internet was important for her too. I'm not mocking these people. What I am mocking is that as an advertisement for Second Life, it isn't the most effective one in regards to the majority of normal people who can move around.
A few hours later, I made 10 bucks by writing a blackjack program for my first in-world friend, the owner of a small casino. Great, you earned minimum wage for doing a job that people get paid a decent salary for.
Where else can you decide to be a bunny one moment, and a 10 foot robot the next? You're not a bunny or a robot. You're sitting at your computer pushing pixels around the screen. "yay, I'm a bunny". "yay, I'm a robot". How fulfilling.
Re:Sometimes not fraud, but sheer ignorance...
on
False Copyright Claims
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Really makes one wonder what sort of deep, dark secrets are in that book that they don't want any "outsiders" to get their hands on a copy!
I'd like to hear more details. "The women of Delta Sigma Theta, a repected African-American women's organization, share more than 250 delicious recipes, compiled from members of the sorority, along with suggested menus and entertaining tips for specific occasions, ranging from bridal and baby showers to book club meetings, a backyard barbecue, and Christmas dinner."
Before it was "yes he's harsh, but he dares speak his mind, and he's right most of the time!". Now it is "yea, whatever, he's just an ass, never mind what he says". I don't think anything has changed over the years. It's just that the longer you speak your mind in a "harsh" -> insulting tone, you end up pissing off more and more people when you eventually hit upon something near and dear to them. Hence:
He lost me personally when he started throwing insults to Subversion He lost me when he insulted another open source developer for having the audacity to write BitKeeper compatible software.
You shouldn't speak for everybody, and use terms like "we" and "our side". In particular, your notions that copyright isn't needed because code could just be decompiled is totally against what RMS believes in. The original motivation behind GPL was sparked by a printer driver that RMS had a binary for, but no source.
"Programmers were free to open the files up if they wanted to, but unless they were an expert in deciphering an endless stream of ones and zeroes, the resulting text was pure gibberish. Although Stallman knew plenty about computers, he was not an expert in translating binary files."
If copyright didn't exist, then for RMS's world some other GPL-like law would be needed to compel authors to provide source. Note that I don't personally agree with RMS's views, but I logically understand them, and they are fundamentally different from what you think. Be able to hack the source is the fundamental idea behind GPL.
He doesn't actually think proprietary software is evil though. That's what RMS believes. That's the body and spirit of the GPL. As such, I don't think Linus should be using the GPL. Nor should anyone else who thinks proprietary software is morally ok. It's perfectly valid for co-existence. Many people who contribute to GPL software are also paid to work on proprietary software. Many people who use GPL software also use proprietary software. I'd guess that not even RMS would want people who don't share his binary world view to abandon GPL completely. I think he'd rather encourage them contribute and use as much GPL software as possible.
The main motivation behind the GPL was that a user should be able to modify their software. If GPL software is embedded in hardware in a non-modifiable form then that violates the fundamental principle upon which the GPL was built.
So yes, something doesn't jive, and that's the Tivoization of GPL software.
Chess and dictation? One is a well defined board game solved by a human-invented evaluation function. The other is just matching spoken words to written words. That is not to say that they are useless or easy to solve, but that they are just single-minded tasks that don't exhibit much intelligence.
There's always this claim that the goal posts are moving, but the Turing test was proposed in 1950. Compressing Wikipedia? I don't care. Having an AI that read the daily paper and could keep up it's part of the conversation? Now that would be impressive.
I think the iPhone opening week pretty much slaughtered that argument.:) Integrated devices, when done well, can be powerfully compelling products. For the PS3 to be valuable as an integrated device, there has to be a big demand for Blu-Ray. There just isn't. The idea that people are going to buy a games console as a PC or media center is laughable. So $600 or even $500 for a game console, when most people don't even own high definition TVs yet, is way too much. Besides all that, the difference in graphics isn't as great between previous generations.
Nintendo got it right with the Wii. Good price and innovation.
I daresay becoming a Jaine would be far more moral and more difficult than following the few things the Bible gets right Ok, a quick search didn't return anything obvious. What's a "Jaine"?
Hmm, now I just re-read the quoted part of your post, and yes he does refer to "normal copyright". The point still stands that there are other licenses that allow sharing without making demands on surrounding code.
According to "normal copyright", you wouldn't be able to distrubute such a thing at all, Complete strawman post. The grandparent was comparing GPL to other licenses like LGPL and BSD, not "normal copyright".
You just can get this with point-n-click interfaces. Sure you can. You just have to build it into the GUI. The GUI can generate logs, scripts, whatever. Ideally all software would have compatible GUI and command line interfaces.
I'm using a 486/66 with a 40MB hard drive as my router. I had a 700 mhz AMD system for over 6 years, up until about 6 months ago. I never spec'd them out for reliability. I did have to replace the motherboard on the 700 mhz system early in it's life, but that was back when a lot of motherboards were failing prematurely.
It's too hard to get accurate predictions about how long a piece of hardware will last. I know there was the somewhat recent story about how hard drive mean-time to failure numbers were bullshit, with the high-end models doing no better than the low-end.
Wow, so you don't know anything, and your only argument is that the people who take what Moore did at face value are stupid. Apparently you like being spoonfed bullshit as long as you agree with the message. Enjoy.
Nintendo has another way to get exclusives: Write them. So do Microsoft and Sony. Nintendo also buys exclusives, like they did with Resident Evil for the Gamecube.
other people's opinions of his work (and the above about amount to nothing but character studies/assasinations) do not discount the factual consistency of his work How about you actually read the link provided? There was plenty of factual disputes presented, plenty of logical arguments presented, and not one fat joke.
it has always stood up to scrutiny Sure, if you just ignore the arguments as personal attacks. How does Moore answer the fact that he changed the timeline of events in Roger and Me? How does he answer the fact that he doctored a campaign ad with a made-up subtitle?
How does he answer charges that his arguments make no sense? From the link:
"Beyond the satire and the fabrications, just what is Moore's argument? It's often hard to tell. At times, while dismissing the influence of pop culture, he blames the government's militarism, suggesting that it's somehow relevant that the day of the Columbine High School shootings was also the day of one of the heaviest U.S.-led NATO bombings in Yugoslavia. (Moore is an ardent opponent of U.S. military intervention - soon after the war on terrorism began, he called the President and Vice President "Bin Bush" and "Bin Cheney" and said on the radio program "Democracy Now" [Real Player audio], "We're the national sniper when it comes to going after countries like Iraq.") Even setting aside this questionable chain of causality, Moore contradicts his own thesis that foreign bombing leads to domestic gun violence when he approvingly notes that the United Kingdom, which played a leading role in bombing Yugoslavia with the U.S., had only 68 gun homicides the same year America had 11,127."
and Moore even guarantees the veracity of all he states How does this disprove any of the allegations against Moore?
Heh, how old are those opinionated subjective hate bashers - teenagers?
Heh, how old are uncritical fanboys? Sophomores? Never mind the explicit details of Moore's lies and distortions, as long as you agree with his message you won't listen to any criticism.
How about you answer the following lies by Moore, described in the article linked by the grandparent:
"At one point in the film, Moore apparently even alters a Bush-Quayle campaign ad, changing history to make a point."
"Moore's problems with veracity date back to 'Roger and Me,' in which he famously shifted the actual timeline of events for dramatic effect."
"'[H]e has been able to kick ten million people off welfare,' he writes in a list of attacks on the former president. While the welfare rolls did drop substantially while Clinton was in office (although the total number as of June 2000 was 8.3 million), many people left voluntarily to take jobs as the economy grew or for other reasons. Far fewer were booted from the rolls by the five-year limits Clinton signed into law in 1996 or by stricter state limits."
and to think otherwise is to buy someone else's propaganda I really think you should read http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html. If you care at all about journalistic integrity, that is. Your impression of the events is exactly what Moore was trying to portray, and he did it through editing. I'm not pro-gun, hard right, or anything. But I can't stand being lied to, and Moore's lies are transparent if you actually look at the evidence. I've read Moore's response on this issue, and it is laughable. But please look for yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as the money aspect goes, I'm just saying making $10 for valued labor is nothing to brag about. I suppose if you're doing it for kicks that's a minor perk, but the money really is pitiful.
I had a family member who died from a long term illness who was mostly confined to her bed. The internet was important for her too. I'm not mocking these people. What I am mocking is that as an advertisement for Second Life, it isn't the most effective one in regards to the majority of normal people who can move around.
I guess the "ragingfist.net" domain name was too subtle? Or the goatse domain host?
Now there's an advertisement: Second Life, the place for the bedridden.
You shouldn't speak for everybody, and use terms like "we" and "our side". In particular, your notions that copyright isn't needed because code could just be decompiled is totally against what RMS believes in. The original motivation behind GPL was sparked by a printer driver that RMS had a binary for, but no source.
Quote from For Want of a Printer:
"Programmers were free to open the files up if they wanted to, but unless they were an expert in deciphering an endless stream of ones and zeroes, the resulting text was pure gibberish. Although Stallman knew plenty about computers, he was not an expert in translating binary files."
If copyright didn't exist, then for RMS's world some other GPL-like law would be needed to compel authors to provide source. Note that I don't personally agree with RMS's views, but I logically understand them, and they are fundamentally different from what you think. Be able to hack the source is the fundamental idea behind GPL.
The main motivation behind the GPL was that a user should be able to modify their software. If GPL software is embedded in hardware in a non-modifiable form then that violates the fundamental principle upon which the GPL was built.
So yes, something doesn't jive, and that's the Tivoization of GPL software.
Chess and dictation? One is a well defined board game solved by a human-invented evaluation function. The other is just matching spoken words to written words. That is not to say that they are useless or easy to solve, but that they are just single-minded tasks that don't exhibit much intelligence.
There's always this claim that the goal posts are moving, but the Turing test was proposed in 1950. Compressing Wikipedia? I don't care. Having an AI that read the daily paper and could keep up it's part of the conversation? Now that would be impressive.
Nintendo got it right with the Wii. Good price and innovation.
Hmm, now I just re-read the quoted part of your post, and yes he does refer to "normal copyright". The point still stands that there are other licenses that allow sharing without making demands on surrounding code.
I'm using a 486/66 with a 40MB hard drive as my router. I had a 700 mhz AMD system for over 6 years, up until about 6 months ago. I never spec'd them out for reliability. I did have to replace the motherboard on the 700 mhz system early in it's life, but that was back when a lot of motherboards were failing prematurely.
It's too hard to get accurate predictions about how long a piece of hardware will last. I know there was the somewhat recent story about how hard drive mean-time to failure numbers were bullshit, with the high-end models doing no better than the low-end.
Stupid. Title. Make.
Sorry, the form of the message counts. Don't make an ugly cover for your book, or use cheap theatrics.
Wow, so you don't know anything, and your only argument is that the people who take what Moore did at face value are stupid. Apparently you like being spoonfed bullshit as long as you agree with the message. Enjoy.
How does he answer charges that his arguments make no sense? From the link:
"Beyond the satire and the fabrications, just what is Moore's argument? It's often hard to tell. At times, while dismissing the influence of pop culture, he blames the government's militarism, suggesting that it's somehow relevant that the day of the Columbine High School shootings was also the day of one of the heaviest U.S.-led NATO bombings in Yugoslavia. (Moore is an ardent opponent of U.S. military intervention - soon after the war on terrorism began, he called the President and Vice President "Bin Bush" and "Bin Cheney" and said on the radio program "Democracy Now" [Real Player audio], "We're the national sniper when it comes to going after countries like Iraq.") Even setting aside this questionable chain of causality, Moore contradicts his own thesis that foreign bombing leads to domestic gun violence when he approvingly notes that the United Kingdom, which played a leading role in bombing Yugoslavia with the U.S., had only 68 gun homicides the same year America had 11,127." and Moore even guarantees the veracity of all he states How does this disprove any of the allegations against Moore?
Heh, how old are uncritical fanboys? Sophomores? Never mind the explicit details of Moore's lies and distortions, as long as you agree with his message you won't listen to any criticism.
How about you answer the following lies by Moore, described in the article linked by the grandparent:
Umm, according to Box Office Mojo, Fahrenheit 911 pulled in $222 million worldwide. I don't think Moore needs a payout from political parties.