Agreed, It does sound like a bunch of hype from Intel to get people thinking -"Hmmm, Intel is bringing out an 1100 megahertz chip soon, I think I'll hold off to buy it instead of this Athlon..."
They promised the paper release in December? Ok, maybe. I'd like to see the papers on this chip, specifically how hot it runs. They promise the silicon release two months after? Hmmm, doubtful. *Maybe* two months after they're supposed to hit the streets...
It does sound as if Intel is trying to get people to wait for their new chip by promising it so soon.
And when did the P III 400Mhz chip make it's OEM debut? March 1, 1999? Can't watch to see the "DEC-Athalon" chip from AMD "Our chip can do 10 things at once!!"
You're right banning lobbyists by itself won't be effective. But you have to get rid of the lobbyists, PACs, SIGs, etc. AND implement term limits so that the aformentioned leeches can pump money into a LONG term investment. Power in our government comes from being an incumbent for a long time, if no one is there a long time, no one gets too powerful and "campaign contributions" become less effective.
Line item veto would also play a minor part in stopping some of the influencing that is currently going on. If a politician is really adept at tacking items on to a bill that has a lot of merit, (s)he can get just about anything they want to passed. Granted it can't be too inflamatory, but what happens is that these "favors" get instituted in waves, over a couple of years. pigback a bit of legislation on this bill a bit more on another two months later, etc, etc.
Actually term limits, line item veto and elimination of soft money (all forms) are still only a small part of the reform that needs to take place in our government.
Our government was never designed to serve as a career choice for greedy men.
This is exactly the reason that our government should make lobbying illegal. The are many special interest groups and companies who are buying influence in our government, and it's not uncommon at all.
What amazes me is that we as a country allow this to happen everyday, and for issues that are far more important than Anti-trust suits...
Just call it "The buying of America", and Bill is the richest kid on the block...makes ya shudder don't it?
Breaking into someone else's computer(network) is bad and should be illegal. Yes, children should be encouraged to respect property, privacy and law.
Just because you break into a home and leave without breaking or taking anything, doesn't mean that you haven't done something wrong. And for those that think that just because you aren't "physically" breaking and entering or aren't doing any "physical" harm, that it's ok, should sign up for a course in ethics. Would you like it done to your system (regardless of how tight your security is or meaningless your data)? Think about the police showing up at your house and entering, looking around making notes, then leaving. Without your knowledge, without your consent, and without breaking anything. Or maybe THEY hack your computer and don't "do any damage?"
Would you be screaming about rights then? You bet your sweet ass you would. But then to turn around and say it's ok, if you do it to someone else, because "I didn't hurt anything..." is just damned hypocritical.
Now, I don't agree with the "dumbing down" of security, but hacking/cracking/phreaking should be discouraged as much as possible. The only exception being in the instance of security testing.
Well, what will end up happening is that we'll go back to oral examinations or hand written essays in class without the benefit of "high-tech" gadgets. In fact one of my college English professors did exactly that. In-class essays were the norm, and she gave you the topic at the beginning of the class so that you didn't just memorize the Cliff's notes on the night before.
It worked pretty well, she relieved pressure by not taking off (too much) for punctuation, grammar and especially spelling.
Hey, until we get celluar uplinks in our skulls, this low-tech approach may be the only way to make sure that the students are actually learning something and not just skating through school.
Nothing wrong with CE? How about the fact that it was scaled down from a desktop OS that was bloated to begin with? How about the fact that it is as buggy as the OS from which it was created? How about the fact that there are at least 3 other palm OSes out there that are vastly superior to it? I see it as a case where Microsoft's ego is so big that it feels it HAS to compete in every market, "jack of all trades, master of none."
And before you reply thinking that I am some Linux geek who trashes MS every chance I get, think again, I'm an MS developer who is very aware of the limitations under which I am forced to work. I'm consistantly faced with mediocre products and numerous work arounds because MS is spread too thin to do one thing really WELL.
What I object to is that MS consistantly releases sub-standard products just because they HAVE to grab market share in every market. This "Me-too!" attitude is spreading them too thin to be able to build reliable software. And it shows.
"The company's ambivalence about its Windows CE handheld business became even more apparent when Philips declined to offer a so-called Jupiter device, which was Microsoft's vision of a sub-notebook based on the Windows CE operating system." So the real question is whether they are speaking out against a sub-par operating system (WinCE) or they are now realizing that the market is already saturated with devices that really don't help the day-to-day business person. Sure it's nice to have a $400 gadget that can access E-mail, schedules, faxes and phone numbers. But jeez, are they really worth it? For most people that is? Shaken
This article assumes that we have not freedom of choice...whether we choose to use it or not, there is the question. When we learn to question a particular technology and assess whether it is right for us, then we have whipped the CyberBeasty. Does the average person NEED a home computer? Probably not. Does the average person NEED a cell phone? A pager? A PDA? etc. etc. I just got a cell phone because it made communications with my wife much easier, we both work and are busy with extra-curricular activities, and in June & July, I lost count of how many times it would have made life easier to have a cell phone to call her and other people. So I broke down and got a free phone one with a reasonable minutes package. I use it more than I expected and certainly for things I don't really need to. But upon evaluation, it has been a worth while addition to my techno-clutter. The cyberclysm will not occur if we remember what it is that the device is supposed to help with and if we actually need help with that task. That and if we can keep from trying to "keep up with the Joneses." Shaken
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, It does sound like a bunch of hype from Intel to get people thinking -"Hmmm, Intel is bringing out an 1100 megahertz chip soon, I think I'll hold off to buy it instead of this Athlon..."
They promised the paper release in December? Ok, maybe. I'd like to see the papers on this chip, specifically how hot it runs. They promise the silicon release two months after? Hmmm, doubtful. *Maybe* two months after they're supposed to hit the streets...
It does sound as if Intel is trying to get people to wait for their new chip by promising it so soon.
And when did the P III 400Mhz chip make it's OEM debut? March 1, 1999? Can't watch to see the "DEC-Athalon" chip from AMD "Our chip can do 10 things at once!!"
Shaken
You're right banning lobbyists by itself won't be effective. But you have to get rid of the lobbyists, PACs, SIGs, etc. AND implement term limits so that the aformentioned leeches can pump money into a LONG term investment. Power in our government comes from being an incumbent for a long time, if no one is there a long time, no one gets too powerful and "campaign contributions" become less effective.
Line item veto would also play a minor part in stopping some of the influencing that is currently going on. If a politician is really adept at tacking items on to a bill that has a lot of merit, (s)he can get just about anything they want to passed. Granted it can't be too inflamatory, but what happens is that these "favors" get instituted in waves, over a couple of years. pigback a bit of legislation on this bill a bit more on another two months later, etc, etc.
Actually term limits, line item veto and elimination of soft money (all forms) are still only a small part of the reform that needs to take place in our government.
Our government was never designed to serve as a career choice for greedy men.
Shaken
This is exactly the reason that our government should make lobbying illegal. The are many special interest groups and companies who are buying influence in our government, and it's not uncommon at all.
What amazes me is that we as a country allow this to happen everyday, and for issues that are far more important than Anti-trust suits...
Just call it "The buying of America", and Bill is the richest kid on the block...makes ya shudder don't it?
Shaken
Breaking into someone else's computer(network) is bad and should be illegal. Yes, children should be encouraged to respect property, privacy and law.
Just because you break into a home and leave without breaking or taking anything, doesn't mean that you haven't done something wrong. And for those that think that just because you aren't "physically" breaking and entering or aren't doing any "physical" harm, that it's ok, should sign up for a course in ethics. Would you like it done to your system (regardless of how tight your security is or meaningless your data)? Think about the police showing up at your house and entering, looking around making notes, then leaving. Without your knowledge, without your consent, and without breaking anything. Or maybe THEY hack your computer and don't "do any damage?"
Would you be screaming about rights then? You bet your sweet ass you would. But then to turn around and say it's ok, if you do it to someone else, because "I didn't hurt anything..." is just damned hypocritical.
Now, I don't agree with the "dumbing down" of security, but hacking/cracking/phreaking should be discouraged as much as possible. The only exception being in the instance of security testing.
Shaken
Well, what will end up happening is that we'll go back to oral examinations or hand written essays in class without the benefit of "high-tech" gadgets. In fact one of my college English professors did exactly that. In-class essays were the norm, and she gave you the topic at the beginning of the class so that you didn't just memorize the Cliff's notes on the night before.
It worked pretty well, she relieved pressure by not taking off (too much) for punctuation, grammar and especially spelling.
Hey, until we get celluar uplinks in our skulls, this low-tech approach may be the only way to make sure that the students are actually learning something and not just skating through school.
Shaken
Nothing wrong with CE? How about the fact that it was scaled down from a desktop OS that was bloated to begin with? How about the fact that it is as buggy as the OS from which it was created? How about the fact that there are at least 3 other palm OSes out there that are vastly superior to it? I see it as a case where Microsoft's ego is so big that it feels it HAS to compete in every market, "jack of all trades, master of none."
And before you reply thinking that I am some Linux geek who trashes MS every chance I get, think again, I'm an MS developer who is very aware of the limitations under which I am forced to work. I'm consistantly faced with mediocre products and numerous work arounds because MS is spread too thin to do one thing really WELL.
What I object to is that MS consistantly releases sub-standard products just because they HAVE to grab market share in every market. This "Me-too!" attitude is spreading them too thin to be able to build reliable software. And it shows.
Shaken
"The company's ambivalence about its Windows CE handheld business became even more apparent when Philips declined to offer a so-called Jupiter device, which was Microsoft's vision of a sub-notebook based on the Windows CE operating system." So the real question is whether they are speaking out against a sub-par operating system (WinCE) or they are now realizing that the market is already saturated with devices that really don't help the day-to-day business person. Sure it's nice to have a $400 gadget that can access E-mail, schedules, faxes and phone numbers. But jeez, are they really worth it? For most people that is? Shaken
This article assumes that we have not freedom of choice...whether we choose to use it or not, there is the question. When we learn to question a particular technology and assess whether it is right for us, then we have whipped the CyberBeasty. Does the average person NEED a home computer? Probably not. Does the average person NEED a cell phone? A pager? A PDA? etc. etc. I just got a cell phone because it made communications with my wife much easier, we both work and are busy with extra-curricular activities, and in June & July, I lost count of how many times it would have made life easier to have a cell phone to call her and other people. So I broke down and got a free phone one with a reasonable minutes package. I use it more than I expected and certainly for things I don't really need to. But upon evaluation, it has been a worth while addition to my techno-clutter. The cyberclysm will not occur if we remember what it is that the device is supposed to help with and if we actually need help with that task. That and if we can keep from trying to "keep up with the Joneses." Shaken