Just don't come crying to us when you get clubbed down for having a "terrorist face", when someone in the police starts blackmailing you for things you don't want your wife to find out or your insurance company decides that you aren't really as crippled as you claimed to be.
Not keyboard-controller, that's already used. Let's use the PC-speaker instead. If there's no connection to the HD, we'll use a microphone on it. It's not like machines haven't steadily become more noisy and annoying, especially after we got CD-ROMs. People don't care for anything but the price anyways.
Who needs'em? I can't for the love of God think of ONE benefit of gestures other than the coolness factor. Play with it for 5 minutes and you get stinky bored with it.
Actually, most libertarians are self-eco-conscious. We want to make money ourselves, and do with it as we please, and only distribute it to the have-nots if we want to and how we want to. We don't want the government telling us who should have our money.
That sounds all nice and dandy, but it would mean just bigger corporations running our lives in the end. Why do you think corporations merge? To kill off competition, so they have to merge too.
You seem to believe that anarchy is the way, because everyone should decide for themselves. However, where does the bigger picture go in? What education should we have? Goals to strive for? Minimum wage? What? What? I don't hear you giving ANY solutions, because you'll have enough money to fool people into buying crap they regret buying. Calling it self-eco-conscious is just a nice word for egoism.
In no way do I want to retreat from the evils of modern society! I was Devil's Advocating the idea that if people want their privacy, its readily available - by relieving ourselves of modern day capabilities. I find it funny that computer geeks want privacy at all when 99% of them don't even GPG their e-mails each and every time.
Well, that was a good point of yours I have to agree. But you'll be put into gazillions of databases anyways, just because you exist or happen to walk in the streets of UK. Also, you miss out on the new technology. Why be afraid of technology? Because it sounds like you are. We should define the acceptable infrastructure of technology instead.
In the end, you seem to believe that a system can evolve randomly into something magnificent. I believe that you need direction, not necessarily centrally controlled, but there need to be a direction. Where do you want to go?
But if I claim to own information about myself, that is also a bad thing, and I must not be allowed to place limitiation on the above organizations making use of it.
There's a subtle difference between information that has been created by someone, and information that is just a small collection of information already there. For instance, your name, address, phone number is usually not even created by you. Neither does anyone claim to own actual knowledge, but the information stored as-is on a CD/DVD-platter for instance. The latter usually involving alot of hard work, thus is why it has value.
So what you should be complaining about is your _privacy_, not that you _own_ information/knowledge about yourself. Because anyone can- and should be able to compile information databases based on observation of the world. Well, there's always exceptions in society though.
Not sure I follow the logic there, toodles.
There's no logic to follow. Law is patched and applied where it hurts most. Sadly, nowadays it seems more like law is bought and paid for where it benefits big corporations.
I don't think you were knee-jerky, perhaps I was. My intention was to shed light from a bigger perspective. Though, any discussion may become meaningless in a bigger perspective. However, that doesn't mean the discussion is wrong. Neither does it mean that copyright is wrong. Wrongness is just a label we apply on stuff around us anyways.
Copyright exists for many reasons. For example, if you write a game and want to show a game-company. You don't want that company to be able to copy your source from your floppy/CD and start selling the game. So we invent laws to control our environment so that bad things stop happening to us, and so that the community at large can benefit. I would apply the same argument to copyright (*sigh*, it's an "information wants to be free"-argument), but not as "the final solution" to "world-evilness" or selfishness. More like a guide, a goal, a point we should- or could strive for. It would demand an entire different society and mindset to be completely free. In a limited world, it's much harder to be/stay nice.
Also keep in mind, just to bring in a new topic, free software. Actually, the GPL has nothing to do with freedom. Since it forces how to distribute it. It ignores that you need to change _people_ in order to prevent abuse. People will just find loopholes around rules. (It's impossible to _force_ a change for the good though)
Let's step up on perspective a little (I'm in the mood;). We label things as bad, but in the long run they might actually be good for us as a people. That is just another label though, so you can imagine that in an even bigger sense you become detached. Everything just is, like a movie or a dream. It's not impossible to be aware of many perspectives, but you can get rather confused at times, or sound like it. Disagreement often arise when talking about two different things anyways;*)
Sorry for all this talk. Just got in the mood. There's more chatter on/. than IRC anyways...;)
Yeah, but I HAVE RIGHTS TOO. It is _MY INFORMATION_, not theirs.
Not really. You cannot own information, since it is not a tangible thing. Even normal ownership of physical things are just a social contract we mostly abide by. However, as a social construct I agree that corporations shouldn't share or sell information about their dealings with you. But only as a good precaution against misuse and economic collapse (not sure if I buy the argument in the header though).
Reading your posts makes me realize I would never buy your products. Not just that, but that you're part of the problem. A tiny little wheel in a big machinery; that dares not take a look at the whole picture. You don't care about other wheels but yourself, which is the problem with most of the machinery to begin with.
I'm not saying I'm better than you. It just dawned to me. Hint: People are born to this planet for other reasons than being kept in the dark and raped over by corporations. Aren't they?
Well, the Windows Update utility for Windows 98 really sucks. The moment I try to get to the right www.microsoft.com pages it crashes IE outright. Yes, I've reinstalled windows etc.
And I do own a legitimate Win98 CD.. Not that I care much. The process would likely fry my HD outright.
Windows Registry continued: Not to mention application/user/whatever-specific rollback/transaction capabilities. There's just so much that should be in such a monolith system, it's very hard to implement it all.
Think the windows registry but for info purposes only so that the install can be more efficient.
The Windows Registry is only for "info purposes". There's no code there, although you could add it in theory. Code is also data, so everything we do with computers is really for "info purposes";-)
What is bad with the Windows Registry is its backup routines (it actually backups at each shutdown I think), lack of decent dependency, consistency and integrity rules and checking, lack of good overview by the user, cryptic keys, too many independent systems within it and too much unnecessary spam already inserted into. In effect the user may be be held hostage by a huge and incomprehensible database that might be corrupted in one way or another.
You've a good idea though, but it's already there in Debian I believe. Unfortunately having many distros means some incompatibility, no matter what.
I really thought this was real, until I saw the Babbage CPU model.. Guess not:-( Also, they didn't mention if the hair is regrowable. What do you do with it the first time you shave it? Seems like a more expensive proposition to me..
And the loss of free software would be? $0! Or something close to that. It's much easier for corporations to claim loss of billions in revenue to piracy. It's because the legal system is made to serve those with money and keeping the poor people in poverty.
But the GPL, Gates says, "breaks that cycle--that is, it makes it impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or build on any of that work. So what you saw with TCP/IP or Sendmail or the browser could never happen. We believe there should be free software and commercial software; there should be a rich ecosystem that works around that."
Anyone can build on it, you just have to follow a license for a change. If you use the sourcecode, you gotta adhere to the GPL. Otherwise, you can do it from scratch, as you should if you absolutely have to play hide'n seek with your code. The specifications and protocols will remain open for anyone to implement, until Microsoft extends them of course. Why not split your parts up into components and truly share your modifications with others on core technology? You can add as many evil NSA-backdoors and fluffy doubleclick-ads you like in the application and kernel anyways.. The article made a very good point that GPLing government code would indeed prevent predatory behaviour.
I'm not familiar with the Mac, but on PC we use(d) software timer interrupts or DMA (preferrably) to be able to play samples and do other things "at the same time". You could use software timer interrupts to playback on the PC-speaker too (but that truly sounded horrible and with varying quality depending on the speaker). To do it in the main game loop would never suffice quality-wise, not in a tight loop either (as the game would halt while sound being played). I guess nowadays you could even use threads, but DMA is the best alternative since it's hardware controlled and frees the CPU (but not the bus).
Thank god Microsoft released Direct Sound. No more varying quality of code from different game-producers from the DOS-era. Microsoft is not all evil through the bone.
Slashdot Mirror
Just don't come crying to us when you get clubbed down for having a "terrorist face", when someone in the police starts blackmailing you for things you don't want your wife to find out or your insurance company decides that you aren't really as crippled as you claimed to be.
- Steeltoe
Well, you've trolled me. "Cops and Robbers" is not a game. When people have crimes committed against them then the perpetrators need to be punished.
Do you even know why?
- Steeltoe
Not keyboard-controller, that's already used. Let's use the PC-speaker instead. If there's no connection to the HD, we'll use a microphone on it. It's not like machines haven't steadily become more noisy and annoying, especially after we got CD-ROMs. People don't care for anything but the price anyways.
- Steeltoe
Yes, you didn't answer the question though ;*)
- Steeltoe
I wonder.. Did you pay for Win2k and Visual Studio? I promise I won't tell anyone! ;-)
- Steeltoe
Who needs'em? I can't for the love of God think of ONE benefit of gestures other than the coolness factor. Play with it for 5 minutes and you get stinky bored with it.
- Steeltoe
Relax man, he was joking.
- Steeltoe
They should patent it then, so that they earn a fortune. Won't convert me though, I hate Opera every time I try it.
- Steeltoe
Also, if accounts get hacked, and your biometric becomes known, do you have have a new thumb grafted on to get a new password?
Of course! With rebates!
- Steeltoe
Actually, most libertarians are self-eco-conscious. We want to make money ourselves, and do with it as we please, and only distribute it to the have-nots if we want to and how we want to. We don't want the government telling us who should have our money.
That sounds all nice and dandy, but it would mean just bigger corporations running our lives in the end. Why do you think corporations merge? To kill off competition, so they have to merge too.
You seem to believe that anarchy is the way, because everyone should decide for themselves. However, where does the bigger picture go in? What education should we have? Goals to strive for? Minimum wage? What? What? I don't hear you giving ANY solutions, because you'll have enough money to fool people into buying crap they regret buying. Calling it self-eco-conscious is just a nice word for egoism.
In no way do I want to retreat from the evils of modern society! I was Devil's Advocating the idea that if people want their privacy, its readily available - by relieving ourselves of modern day capabilities. I find it funny that computer geeks want privacy at all when 99% of them don't even GPG their e-mails each and every time.
Well, that was a good point of yours I have to agree. But you'll be put into gazillions of databases anyways, just because you exist or happen to walk in the streets of UK. Also, you miss out on the new technology. Why be afraid of technology? Because it sounds like you are. We should define the acceptable infrastructure of technology instead.
In the end, you seem to believe that a system can evolve randomly into something magnificent. I believe that you need direction, not necessarily centrally controlled, but there need to be a direction. Where do you want to go?
- Steeltoe
But if I claim to own information about myself, that is also a bad thing, and I must not be allowed to place limitiation on the above organizations making use of it.
There's a subtle difference between information that has been created by someone, and information that is just a small collection of information already there. For instance, your name, address, phone number is usually not even created by you. Neither does anyone claim to own actual knowledge, but the information stored as-is on a CD/DVD-platter for instance. The latter usually involving alot of hard work, thus is why it has value.
So what you should be complaining about is your _privacy_, not that you _own_ information/knowledge about yourself. Because anyone can- and should be able to compile information databases based on observation of the world. Well, there's always exceptions in society though.
Not sure I follow the logic there, toodles.
There's no logic to follow. Law is patched and applied where it hurts most. Sadly, nowadays it seems more like law is bought and paid for where it benefits big corporations.
- Steeltoe
I don't think you were knee-jerky, perhaps I was. My intention was to shed light from a bigger perspective. Though, any discussion may become meaningless in a bigger perspective. However, that doesn't mean the discussion is wrong. Neither does it mean that copyright is wrong. Wrongness is just a label we apply on stuff around us anyways.
;). We label things as bad, but in the long run they might actually be good for us as a people. That is just another label though, so you can imagine that in an even bigger sense you become detached. Everything just is, like a movie or a dream. It's not impossible to be aware of many perspectives, but you can get rather confused at times, or sound like it. Disagreement often arise when talking about two different things anyways ;*)
/. than IRC anyways... ;)
Copyright exists for many reasons. For example, if you write a game and want to show a game-company. You don't want that company to be able to copy your source from your floppy/CD and start selling the game. So we invent laws to control our environment so that bad things stop happening to us, and so that the community at large can benefit. I would apply the same argument to copyright (*sigh*, it's an "information wants to be free"-argument), but not as "the final solution" to "world-evilness" or selfishness. More like a guide, a goal, a point we should- or could strive for. It would demand an entire different society and mindset to be completely free. In a limited world, it's much harder to be/stay nice.
Also keep in mind, just to bring in a new topic, free software. Actually, the GPL has nothing to do with freedom. Since it forces how to distribute it. It ignores that you need to change _people_ in order to prevent abuse. People will just find loopholes around rules. (It's impossible to _force_ a change for the good though)
Let's step up on perspective a little (I'm in the mood
Sorry for all this talk. Just got in the mood. There's more chatter on
- Steeltoe
Yeah, but I HAVE RIGHTS TOO. It is _MY INFORMATION_, not theirs.
Not really. You cannot own information, since it is not a tangible thing. Even normal ownership of physical things are just a social contract we mostly abide by. However, as a social construct I agree that corporations shouldn't share or sell information about their dealings with you. But only as a good precaution against misuse and economic collapse (not sure if I buy the argument in the header though).
- Steeltoe
Reading your posts makes me realize I would never buy your products. Not just that, but that you're part of the problem. A tiny little wheel in a big machinery; that dares not take a look at the whole picture. You don't care about other wheels but yourself, which is the problem with most of the machinery to begin with.
I'm not saying I'm better than you. It just dawned to me. Hint: People are born to this planet for other reasons than being kept in the dark and raped over by corporations. Aren't they?
- Steeltoe
Well, the Windows Update utility for Windows 98 really sucks. The moment I try to get to the right www.microsoft.com pages it crashes IE outright. Yes, I've reinstalled windows etc.
And I do own a legitimate Win98 CD.. Not that I care much. The process would likely fry my HD outright.
- Steeltoe
Windows Registry continued: Not to mention application/user/whatever-specific rollback/transaction capabilities. There's just so much that should be in such a monolith system, it's very hard to implement it all.
- Steeltoe
Here's my only tit to pick:
;-)
Think the windows registry but for info purposes only so that the install can be more efficient.
The Windows Registry is only for "info purposes". There's no code there, although you could add it in theory. Code is also data, so everything we do with computers is really for "info purposes"
What is bad with the Windows Registry is its backup routines (it actually backups at each shutdown I think), lack of decent dependency, consistency and integrity rules and checking, lack of good overview by the user, cryptic keys, too many independent systems within it and too much unnecessary spam already inserted into. In effect the user may be be held hostage by a huge and incomprehensible database that might be corrupted in one way or another.
You've a good idea though, but it's already there in Debian I believe. Unfortunately having many distros means some incompatibility, no matter what.
- Steeltoe
I really thought this was real, until I saw the Babbage CPU model.. Guess not :-( Also, they didn't mention if the hair is regrowable. What do you do with it the first time you shave it? Seems like a more expensive proposition to me..
- Steeltoe
I agree, even though on a technical note Windows NT is supported on Alpha too.
Forget Arthur C. Clarke, this is the real 2001:
Oh my God! It's Full Of SPAM!
- Steeltoe
And the loss of free software would be? $0! Or something close to that. It's much easier for corporations to claim loss of billions in revenue to piracy. It's because the legal system is made to serve those with money and keeping the poor people in poverty.
- Steeltoe
But the GPL, Gates says, "breaks that cycle--that is, it makes it impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or build on any of that work. So what you saw with TCP/IP or Sendmail or the browser could never happen. We believe there should be free software and commercial software; there should be a rich ecosystem that works around that."
Anyone can build on it, you just have to follow a license for a change. If you use the sourcecode, you gotta adhere to the GPL. Otherwise, you can do it from scratch, as you should if you absolutely have to play hide'n seek with your code. The specifications and protocols will remain open for anyone to implement, until Microsoft extends them of course. Why not split your parts up into components and truly share your modifications with others on core technology? You can add as many evil NSA-backdoors and fluffy doubleclick-ads you like in the application and kernel anyways.. The article made a very good point that GPLing government code would indeed prevent predatory behaviour.
Clue: Sharing is not a one-way process.
- Steeltoe
Read the book! The movies were crap.
- Steeltoe
I'm not sure I follow you. What is creating this low frequency beat. The frequency of the light and the frequency of the blinking?
- Steeltoe
I'm not familiar with the Mac, but on PC we use(d) software timer interrupts or DMA (preferrably) to be able to play samples and do other things "at the same time". You could use software timer interrupts to playback on the PC-speaker too (but that truly sounded horrible and with varying quality depending on the speaker). To do it in the main game loop would never suffice quality-wise, not in a tight loop either (as the game would halt while sound being played). I guess nowadays you could even use threads, but DMA is the best alternative since it's hardware controlled and frees the CPU (but not the bus).
Thank god Microsoft released Direct Sound. No more varying quality of code from different game-producers from the DOS-era. Microsoft is not all evil through the bone.
- Steeltoe
This is hillarious. You could include a (TM) :-)
- Steeltoe