We know from dreams that the brain can process things quicker where our sense of time passing is not "real time" (ie, a dream that seems to go on for 30 minutes might take place in a MUCH shorter ammount of real time).
This is an old belief, but has been proven wrong by doctor Stephen LaBerge at Stanford. How?
Lucid dreaming is to know that you dream while you dream. In dreams, the eye movements we make are also made with our real eyes. As such, they can be used as a way for dreamers to contact people doing experiments on them. What LaBerge did was to monitor the eye's movements, and instruct a lucid dreamer (lucidity can be trained) to count in his dream, and excecute a certain pattern of movement with his eyes whenever he counted to X (probably ten, can't remember).
It turns out that dream-time is just as fast as wake-time, and that the feeling of experiencing a year in a period of 30 minutes probably works like it does in movies. A man jumps into bed, the scene fades, you see the morning light come in and the man wakes up. In reality, a few seconds passed, but the movie gave you the illusion of a night passing. Now add to that that dreams affect all your senses (or at least have the ability of doing so).
Not so strange, eh? (Also, if you want to spend some time experiencing really surreal things, start doing lucid dreaming. It's awesome.)
This is only true when you have code depending on other code, and thus people needing to communicate with others. Open source software obviously does not suffer from this as Linux's thousands of contributors do not need to communicate with all of each other. Re-read the Cathedral and the Bazaar.
I fully agree, as re-production of physical items has a very tangible cost, while re-production of digital ones does not, you can not compare the two.
Re:Why is this under "Linux"
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1
Because the Linux section is not just about the kernel, but about the entire GNU/Linux system. Everything GNU is going to become GPL3, since the GNU project own all the code copyrights.
This includes things extremely vital to running a Linux system, such as the gcc program.
It should also be noted that we are more than a wellfare state. Those of us who know anything about national economics agree that we do not have a free market and that we do not have a socialist system.
We call our system a mixed economy, and it consists of a market and a set of laws to control that market. This is what the US system is aswell, but ours has a much larger set of laws. Yes, our market is free by default and then has a blacklist of things that aren't allowed, just like the US. However, we think that the market is a tool, not a universal way of life that produces liquid happiness. We have very few qualms about imposing rules to make this tool work, and that is visible in our legislation.
Er, this is turning into gibberish, but along with the wellfare this is an important thing to note. We are much closer to socialist economies than you'd think if you just said we have a free market.
Condoms and education on how to use them work pretty well. (Check out in 1980 when this education was made mandatory for every marrying couple in Iran: http://tinyurl.com/27nepb - just drag the bottom slider to the right to see progress over time, height indicates number of children born per woman.)
Now, I don't feel like getting into an argument since this all boils down to morals pretty much instantly, but I felt I'd post this since thoughts didn't appear to have crossed your mind yet.
Same reason for why we'd release anti-virus programs (Clam AV) or web servers (Apache) under open source licenses. It helps us continually improve the software, and helps us remove any flaws that are disclosed.
DRM often works in this way: You have "the lock", your method, the software. This is what they want to work without flaws. Then they have "the key", which are some sort of crypto key. What they want is the usage of the lock and key to be unnoticable by the user. Letting people improve the lock does not mean you give people access to the keys.
I have no idea of why you went out on the gas tangent.
What I meant by the fundie-thing was this:
A lot of people have very negative views on religions (doesn't matter which). Most of the time, the majority of these religion's practicioners are not nearly as bad as people think they are. This, I ponder, is due to the fact that those who are radical in their opinions get much more media attention than the average practicioner of a religion.
E.g. Al-Qaeda get a lot more attention than non-radical muslims, therefore people see Islam as a whole in a more negative light than they would if they had realised that there are far more non-radicals than there are radicals. Same goes for christians and Jack Thompson.
Same, hopefully, goes for Americans who argue about toilet seats. There are hopefully a lot more who don't care about it than there are people who argue about it, but the latter get media attention (through sit-com jokes etc) and are thus overrepresented. From the other replies I got to my original post, this would seem to be the case.
(This has got to be the silliest thread I have ever seen on Slashdot!)
I agree completely. Why the fuck is this topic such a common argument in the US? Are people so petty over there? Now I don't know about other european nations, but I live in Sweden and I have never ever heard (or heard about) anybody have this arguent in real life.
I hope it's the typical thing of the nasty minority (like fundies in religions) making a huge ruckus, because it boggles my mind that an entire nation of people would have this argument.
Yes, and the belief that dividing people into nations is meaningful, to me, is inhumane. You should take care of your neighbour wether there's a geographical line between your houses or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Yea, I knew about this but it's good info that should definitely be out there (and common knowledge by now). Mod parent (and grand parent ;) up.
Lucid dreaming is to know that you dream while you dream. In dreams, the eye movements we make are also made with our real eyes. As such, they can be used as a way for dreamers to contact people doing experiments on them. What LaBerge did was to monitor the eye's movements, and instruct a lucid dreamer (lucidity can be trained) to count in his dream, and excecute a certain pattern of movement with his eyes whenever he counted to X (probably ten, can't remember).
It turns out that dream-time is just as fast as wake-time, and that the feeling of experiencing a year in a period of 30 minutes probably works like it does in movies. A man jumps into bed, the scene fades, you see the morning light come in and the man wakes up. In reality, a few seconds passed, but the movie gave you the illusion of a night passing. Now add to that that dreams affect all your senses (or at least have the ability of doing so).
Not so strange, eh? (Also, if you want to spend some time experiencing really surreal things, start doing lucid dreaming. It's awesome.)
Because everybody knows that corpses smell great, and also that dead people can hold their bowels.
:(
Wait, shit, no.
Or making apple commercials on slashdot.
Just a headsup, OpenOffice is one of SUN's products, not a company.
Hello and welcome to slashdot. I think you might find this interesting: http://en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Slashdot
Browse at higher thresholds. Read articles a day late, but keep an eye on the RSS-feed for ultra-important looking stuff.
This message was brought to you by your friendly internet painkiller.
Indeed it isn't, and there was a really informative and funny talk on Google Tech Talks about it about 6 months back. It is available here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-824646398 0976635143
This is only true when you have code depending on other code, and thus people needing to communicate with others. Open source software obviously does not suffer from this as Linux's thousands of contributors do not need to communicate with all of each other. Re-read the Cathedral and the Bazaar.
+5 insightful. lol.
I fully agree, as re-production of physical items has a very tangible cost, while re-production of digital ones does not, you can not compare the two.
Because the Linux section is not just about the kernel, but about the entire GNU/Linux system. Everything GNU is going to become GPL3, since the GNU project own all the code copyrights.
This includes things extremely vital to running a Linux system, such as the gcc program.
Collectively, they buy Microsoft products for billions of dollars, and use them in their everyday lives.
Ah, the wonders of the free market. Tool or freedom -> Erotica. Yes.
Sweden here.
It should also be noted that we are more than a wellfare state. Those of us who know anything about national economics agree that we do not have a free market and that we do not have a socialist system.
We call our system a mixed economy, and it consists of a market and a set of laws to control that market. This is what the US system is aswell, but ours has a much larger set of laws. Yes, our market is free by default and then has a blacklist of things that aren't allowed, just like the US. However, we think that the market is a tool, not a universal way of life that produces liquid happiness. We have very few qualms about imposing rules to make this tool work, and that is visible in our legislation.
Er, this is turning into gibberish, but along with the wellfare this is an important thing to note. We are much closer to socialist economies than you'd think if you just said we have a free market.
Condoms and education on how to use them work pretty well. (Check out in 1980 when this education was made mandatory for every marrying couple in Iran: http://tinyurl.com/27nepb - just drag the bottom slider to the right to see progress over time, height indicates number of children born per woman.)
I would also like to note that you are not taking rape into account. (Check http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html for stats.)
Now, I don't feel like getting into an argument since this all boils down to morals pretty much instantly, but I felt I'd post this since thoughts didn't appear to have crossed your mind yet.
All in good will,
Regards.
eee
Same reason for why we'd release anti-virus programs (Clam AV) or web servers (Apache) under open source licenses. It helps us continually improve the software, and helps us remove any flaws that are disclosed.
DRM often works in this way: You have "the lock", your method, the software. This is what they want to work without flaws. Then they have "the key", which are some sort of crypto key. What they want is the usage of the lock and key to be unnoticable by the user. Letting people improve the lock does not mean you give people access to the keys.
Nobody talks about it. I usually put both the toilet seat and lid down, but I haven't keep track of others.
I have no idea of why you went out on the gas tangent.
What I meant by the fundie-thing was this:
A lot of people have very negative views on religions (doesn't matter which). Most of the time, the majority of these religion's practicioners are not nearly as bad as people think they are. This, I ponder, is due to the fact that those who are radical in their opinions get much more media attention than the average practicioner of a religion.
E.g. Al-Qaeda get a lot more attention than non-radical muslims, therefore people see Islam as a whole in a more negative light than they would if they had realised that there are far more non-radicals than there are radicals. Same goes for christians and Jack Thompson.
Same, hopefully, goes for Americans who argue about toilet seats. There are hopefully a lot more who don't care about it than there are people who argue about it, but the latter get media attention (through sit-com jokes etc) and are thus overrepresented. From the other replies I got to my original post, this would seem to be the case.
I hope it's the typical thing of the nasty minority (like fundies in religions) making a huge ruckus, because it boggles my mind that an entire nation of people would have this argument.
[b]Everyman[/b] needs porn.
Yes, and the belief that dividing people into nations is meaningful, to me, is inhumane. You should take care of your neighbour wether there's a geographical line between your houses or not.
Now, we don't belong to the same nation, but when it comes to nationalism I am inclined to think that the owner of my nation is the enemy of my class.