One or the other will be regulating the internet. There is no perfect solution, but at least with government there is a chance of some accountability. If it's left to comcast, ATT, etc al, there is zero chance.
No, your argument is a straw man and so doesn't need refuting. Were camcorders permitted at the screening? If so, then my statement was misapplied to the situation. Otherwise, not. I thought it was obvious that my point was simply that sneaking a camcorder into a theatre is a low thing to do. That is my opinion. You've said nothing to refute that point, nor AFAICT have you even voiced an intelligible opinion on the matter (no offense).
AFAICS, you're just trying to rationalize the idea of sneaking camcorders into theatres, and spewing nonsense at me for saying what I did.
The only link relevant to the new book in TFS demands my email address in order to see anything.
Correction, the page just requires scrolling down to see the 12 steps. Damn, foiled by my own pessimism! But at nearly $100 for a download, couldn't you at least buy an ISBN?
The only link relevant to the new book in TFS demands my email address in order to see anything. Not terribly motivating.
Besides, 12 steps? I'm recovering from that, thanks.
Moderation 0
50% Troll
30% Funny
20% Interesting
Wow, so at least 30% of people with mod points today actually have a sense of humor, while only half are neocon retards -- There is hope after all!
Okay, you're correct. I should not have said "a person's health is no-one else's business, ever, period", that's just obviously not true. We want the police, airline pilots, cab drivers, surgeons, etc to be free of certain medical issues for the sake of the public safety. In fact, for quite a few jobs it gets a bit tricky to draw the line. But CEO isn't really one of them, at least IMO.
If Dubya can fail to disclose his obvious developmental disability all these years then certainly everyone else is entitled to privacy, too. Look at Reagan, he never admitted he had Alzheimer's until long after leaving the White House (though everyone but possibly him certainly knew anyway). And just look at McCain! -- Okay. okay, I'll stop now.
But seriously. a person's health is no-one else's business, ever, period.
I upload already compressed FLV and find that the video has the same audio quality as I had encoded.
That definitely seems like it would be the best solution, but that's assuming niceone isn't already using flv for his uploads clips. Does youtube do more processing on an flv, even if it's submitted as "ready"?
If you can present your material in such a way that no conversion is necessary on youtube's end, that will always give you the most control over the end result.
I remember being unhappy with the sound I ended up with years ago when my recordings got mastered to CD, but then I learned the way to beat that is to record digitally and master it myself. If you fall in love with the sound of a format you will end up disappointed unless the format in question is ubiquitous.
I thought MS was determined to kill XP, so what point are they trying to make
showing how well it can run on the XO? I find this a bit confusing, like MS is
talking out both sides of their mouth or something. Are they really going
to stop selling XP as they keep claiming, or are they going to build a "new"
windows netbook edtion based on XP, or are they just going to keep offering XP
alongside Vista? Seems to me either the second or third options would be the
most realistic, but they keep saying the opposite. What gives, MS?
TFA also links to a blog containing a claim of an
XP RTM for the Intel Classmate Puzzling.
Yes indeed, I love mc -- but Norton Commander was even before mc. In fact, I think it may be the only originally-for-DOS program still commonly used on every popular OS (correct me if I've missed another). I have mc running in an iTerm on my Mac at all times, in Eterm or xterm on BSD and Linux, and even in cmd.exe on Windows boxen. It's always the very first thing I install after a new OS.
I used to work in an office which was a complete free-for-all. Once I had some code I needed to test on a Windows machine (mine was Linux), and I saw that (let's call him) "John", who had a Windows box was away from his desk. Just on a hunch, I sat down and typed his username, and entered "password" for the password (literally). Poof, I was in! So I did my little test thing and was about to log off, when "John" appeared, smiling. He said, "Oh thank God you got my login, I've been locked out of the system all day because I can't remember my password! What is it?" It was perhaps the only time in my life I actually knew what it meant to "be at a loss for words"
Probably they would rather sell it to everyone because they'd make more money. Also, there could be anti-trust implications of MS making displays that work only with Windows. And finally, if they did do that, it wouldn't be more than a week or two before some linux hackers got it working with their favorite OS.
I share your concerns, but I would argue that those are all good reasons to become more politically active, not to hold us back from achieving better use of technology. The kind of government we have allowed to develop is the problem here, after all. And they are already abusing our current technology. Does that mean we should all become Amish?
It seems several of your concerns revolve around what you perceive as lack of privately owned cars, but that is not actually a premise of the essays. He specifies that some people will still maintain personal vehicles, though for many doing so will no longer make economic sense. Similarly, your complaint of refueling on longer trips assumes there will be no more fuel-powered vehicles, but that assumption is not made in the essays either. If you read the whole thing (including the "stories" section), I think you'll find he's made a compelling case. Oh, and also your concern about store hopping -- just reserve the car until the trip is concluded, nothing I read would stop you doing that. Same for gigs, beach outings, etc. The only really big legitimate objections I can see many people having are that (1) the scenario he envisions would probably result in privately owned vehicles dedicated only to their owners' convenience becoming quite a bit more expensive than they are now (though I would actually call that a good thing, as IMO it should be more expensive to be wasteful), and (2) individual privacy could be affected.
But then really, personal privacy is quickly becoming a thing of the past anyway, and may well be unavoidable. But that's a whole other can of worms...
Slashdot Mirror
Duh, I meant "et al".
One or the other will be regulating the internet. There is no perfect solution, but at least with government there is a chance of some accountability. If it's left to comcast, ATT, etc al, there is zero chance.
Maybe that's why TFS said "free", rather than "FREE"?
Oh, this is going to be fun, I can hardly wait! BTW the download link in TFA appears to be broken, you can get it here.
No, your argument is a straw man and so doesn't need refuting. Were camcorders permitted at the screening? If so, then my statement was misapplied to the situation. Otherwise, not. I thought it was obvious that my point was simply that sneaking a camcorder into a theatre is a low thing to do. That is my opinion. You've said nothing to refute that point, nor AFAICT have you even voiced an intelligible opinion on the matter (no offense). AFAICS, you're just trying to rationalize the idea of sneaking camcorders into theatres, and spewing nonsense at me for saying what I did.
And of course the person who takes a camcorder to a theatre only uses it to record the trailers and help the studios, right?
Much as I dislike the whole heavy handed **AA nonsense, people who sneak camcorders into theatres are just low.
Correction, the page just requires scrolling down to see the 12 steps. Damn, foiled by my own pessimism! But at nearly $100 for a download, couldn't you at least buy an ISBN?
The only link relevant to the new book in TFS demands my email address in order to see anything. Not terribly motivating.
Besides, 12 steps? I'm recovering from that, thanks.
Moderation 0
50% Troll
30% Funny
20% Interesting
Wow, so at least 30% of people with mod points today actually have a sense of humor, while only half are neocon retards -- There is hope after all!
Okay, you're correct. I should not have said "a person's health is no-one else's business, ever, period", that's just obviously not true. We want the police, airline pilots, cab drivers, surgeons, etc to be free of certain medical issues for the sake of the public safety. In fact, for quite a few jobs it gets a bit tricky to draw the line. But CEO isn't really one of them, at least IMO.
I was not referring to that. Jeesh!
I believe that may depend upon the identity behind the pronoun "you" in your statement.
Damn good answer!
If Dubya can fail to disclose his obvious developmental disability all these years then certainly everyone else is entitled to privacy, too. Look at Reagan, he never admitted he had Alzheimer's until long after leaving the White House (though everyone but possibly him certainly knew anyway). And just look at McCain! -- Okay. okay, I'll stop now.
But seriously. a person's health is no-one else's business, ever, period.
That definitely seems like it would be the best solution, but that's assuming niceone isn't already using flv for his uploads clips. Does youtube do more processing on an flv, even if it's submitted as "ready"? If you can present your material in such a way that no conversion is necessary on youtube's end, that will always give you the most control over the end result.
I remember being unhappy with the sound I ended up with years ago when my recordings got mastered to CD, but then I learned the way to beat that is to record digitally and master it myself. If you fall in love with the sound of a format you will end up disappointed unless the format in question is ubiquitous.
I thought MS was determined to kill XP, so what point are they trying to make showing how well it can run on the XO? I find this a bit confusing, like MS is talking out both sides of their mouth or something. Are they really going to stop selling XP as they keep claiming, or are they going to build a "new" windows netbook edtion based on XP, or are they just going to keep offering XP alongside Vista? Seems to me either the second or third options would be the most realistic, but they keep saying the opposite. What gives, MS? TFA also links to a blog containing a claim of an XP RTM for the Intel Classmate
Puzzling.
Yes indeed, I love mc -- but Norton Commander was even before mc. In fact, I think it may be the only originally-for-DOS program still commonly used on every popular OS (correct me if I've missed another). I have mc running in an iTerm on my Mac at all times, in Eterm or xterm on BSD and Linux, and even in cmd.exe on Windows boxen. It's always the very first thing I install after a new OS.
I used to work in an office which was a complete free-for-all. Once I had some code I needed to test on a Windows machine (mine was Linux), and I saw that (let's call him) "John", who had a Windows box was away from his desk. Just on a hunch, I sat down and typed his username, and entered "password" for the password (literally). Poof, I was in! So I did my little test thing and was about to log off, when "John" appeared, smiling. He said, "Oh thank God you got my login, I've been locked out of the system all day because I can't remember my password! What is it?" It was perhaps the only time in my life I actually knew what it meant to "be at a loss for words"
AH HA! See, Childs was right , he is the only competent one!
Probably they would rather sell it to everyone because they'd make more money. Also, there could be anti-trust implications of MS making displays that work only with Windows. And finally, if they did do that, it wouldn't be more than a week or two before some linux hackers got it working with their favorite OS.
I share your concerns, but I would argue that those are all good reasons to become more politically active, not to hold us back from achieving better use of technology. The kind of government we have allowed to develop is the problem here, after all. And they are already abusing our current technology. Does that mean we should all become Amish?
It seems several of your concerns revolve around what you perceive as lack of privately owned cars, but that is not actually a premise of the essays. He specifies that some people will still maintain personal vehicles, though for many doing so will no longer make economic sense. Similarly, your complaint of refueling on longer trips assumes there will be no more fuel-powered vehicles, but that assumption is not made in the essays either. If you read the whole thing (including the "stories" section), I think you'll find he's made a compelling case.
Oh, and also your concern about store hopping -- just reserve the car until the trip is concluded, nothing I read would stop you doing that. Same for gigs, beach outings, etc.
The only really big legitimate objections I can see many people having are that
(1) the scenario he envisions would probably result in privately owned vehicles dedicated only to their owners' convenience becoming quite a bit more expensive than they are now (though I would actually call that a good thing, as IMO it should be more expensive to be wasteful), and
(2) individual privacy could be affected. But then really, personal privacy is quickly becoming a thing of the past anyway, and may well be unavoidable. But that's a whole other can of worms...
Actually, I know of at least four others.
Yes, I'm a subscriber and a fast reader (but not a "he"). It's nice to be able to RTFA and still be an early commenter sometimes.