I heard that Kily Minoque's first song "I should be so lucky", both music and vocals were written in 15 minutes. It then took only another 30 minutes to record it...
's funny. A "serious" programming language lets also redefine everything including keywords. This language is called Rebol and I'm so enthousiastic about it, that I'm busy implementing a GPL'ed version of it. (not on the net yet, still got a lot of work to do).
Terrorism is the new trend, already "used" by Israely PM Sharon to excuse himself for attacking his political opponents (ie Palestinians).
Ofcourse, and this bill gives a free passport, "the fight against terrorism" can be abused to fight your political opponents. A Canadian is not a domestic resident, is he? Nor am I. My fears for abuse come from my distrust in any government...
Still, the economic embargo did not have the desired effect. Cancelling the embargo and finding other ways to push Saddam of the throne can save millions of children. That's why I think that we - the west - can be held responsible for the death of those children, but Albright responded that she didn't care...
In a speech from Osama himself, he declares that the plane attacks on NY, Pentagon and Pennsilvania were retaliations for lots of stuff, including the story I posted above... Even if you agree or disagree with any standpoint, still I think it is unwise to piss millions of people off.
Do you consider the death of 1.5 million Iraqi children as a good price for the good cause?
And not to mention the economic embargo on Iraq. It was done to push Saddam of the throne. Meanwhile, Saddam plays the game well and the economic embargo hasn't helped a thing.
1.5 million children died because of hunger and sickness due to the embargo. A european action group, protesting against the embargo (and finding *other* ways to push Saddam) has asked former minister Albright "Is this (the dead children) the price we want to pay?" she answered "yes, this is the price we want to pay"
So if I understand well, good is us, and bad is the rest of the world. Killing US citizens is a bad thing, while killing children who don't even knew they were Iraqi is a good thing.
Bashing the camera's may be the solution. In my country, it is becoming a sport for speeding camera's...
People just want to race, so we destroy the speeding camera's. Here are some pictures. By the way, even Jeremy Clarkson from the BBC program "Top Gear" made a report on these guys...;)
In the first place, the author of the article is a "she"... in the second place, correct factual reasons for exclusion are given: punks being rejected (excluded) from the shopping mall. It's not the camera's promoting this exclusion, but the paradigm "once a thief, always a thief". The camera's therefore do not promote exclusion, but utilizes exclusion. Without the camera's, it is unfeasible to uphold exclusion, while the desire might exist. The camera's make such an exclusion feasible, fulfilling an existing desire. Unfortunately, such desires and paradigms are often based on irrational fears. I cannot support systems who'm utilize such irrational fears. The excluded punk may come to the shopping mall with the intention to buy something, even while he shoplifted the week before.
As "The new war against terrorism" can be used to eliminate your political enemies (1), you can use this system to harras your political enemies (2)...
1. The Palestinian 'warriors' are now called terrorists by pm. Sharon. It obviously depends on the side you're on, what you call them right? This is just a simple example of tools and purpose.
2a. Karl Marx wrote a book, trying to make an improvement on the social system. It was later implemented as Leninism, and after it became communism. Although, lots of bad things happened in communistic countries, Karl Marx designed the fundamentals for the system, but did not have the intension for people to loose freedom of speech. Due to the short-sighted people wondering around in governments these days, there will be no second "Karl Marx" even when it's somebody with an grotesk good idea, supposedly some post-democratic idea serving the people better than current democracy itself. KM2 will be labeled as an enemy of the state, and he can be harrassed for minor law violations captured on camera. Maybe you feel comfortable with your gouvernment, but I'd call that rather naieve... The government gets a tool with which they can prevent me having a better idea than they have, about running a nation. Perhaps I have an even simpler idea - a good plan for weapon control... the government can harras me and shut me up using the camera's, because the days of simply shooting "Martin Luther King" are over. You've got to punish these "enemies of the state" the legal way...
2b. When people are excluded, they will repel. Retaliation for such an exclusion will be much more violent than the committed crime used as motive for the exlusion in the first place. My freedoms are taken away if the grounds for such an exclusion are lowered. If they want to put me in place, then I will either emigrate or kill myself - acceptance is no option.
2c. People like me, want to have the right to have something to hide. I won't be hiding a bomb, but I might be hiding simple embarrasing stuff. I want to have the right to be embarresed about things. The camera's threaten this because they take away anonimity, while being in public generates anonimity. Camera's give extra stress. One tends to act different than one actually desires. So my freedoms are taken away as I'm urged to act politely, while the public does not necesary demands this from me. In a free country, I have the right to act as I want, even if some people find this impolite. If that right is taken away from me, I want the right to commit suicide instead of accepting the rules and adapting to those morals and values somebody else has created for me (ie. Cleopatra died this way!)
2d. I don't want some assholes who control the camera, take away my girlfriends innocence and decency because they're looking through they're sneaky camera's like she's a prostitute. Bad thing is, it is recorded, and it may end up in somebody's living room on their wall. If somebody in public takes close-up pictures of her breasts, he will loose his teeth and his eyesight for life. Somebody doing this watching in a sneaky way, can not be punished that easily as we don't know about it. So in this case, the camera takes away my ability to punish assholes. Taking away my ability is the same as taking away my freedom.
is the first step in controlling people's life. Probably this is the reason why I cannot support the camera infrastructure.
Putting people into their place indeed takes away oppertunities. So if you carry the wrong smart-card, you can just as well commit suicide because life has indeed no meaning for you at all.
The fears in the article are extremely exagerated, because the tool is used for the purposes the government has defined, so one should fear his government. Besides that, the fear still is realistic because governments tend to make the obvious 'undesired' decisions in order to fight some recognizable enemy (crime, drugs, terrorism, child porn, insecurity).
The element of exclusion is probably the most dangerous. Suppose a big group is banned from the shopping malls, public areas with clubs and bars, and so on. As they have something in common, these people will probably organize themselves in a place where there are no camera's. They will find ways because they're not stupid...
They might destroy the camera's but they will be - sure - even more violent in their crimes than they would be without the camera's, because the capture risks are higher, so there's more at stake than without the camera's. This could be the scenario of "putting people into their assigned place" when you're talking about a culture who'm does not accept authority like the British do. In a non-acceptance culture (like my culture) the more rules and the more tougher upholding the law gets, the more violent retaliation of criminals will be the community costs.
Here in the Netherlands (and I think this goes for the USA too), excluding people is retaliated by those excluded. So exclusion is in my opinion not even near a solution. If this is the consequence of CCTV systems, this must be greatly considered, as we don't want anymore Timothy McVeighs right? If governments use this tech for the wrong purposes (exclusion), than we'll be fighting terrorism now, but an army of Timothy McVeighs within the next 10 years - not the most preferred gift for your children...
It has been said before - who is your audience. Linux has a strange market as a lot of people are used to the convenience of -free- software. That's perhaps the reason why Loki was having a hard time doing business.
I don't know what the business performance of Borland is with for example "Kylix", but for now, I haven't seen any free software yet, which was made with Kylix (does not mean it doesn't exist) but it makes me believe that their Kylix project was lesser success than intentionally expected.
Before Borland/Inprise started the Kylix project, they published a survey on their site, to investigate market demand. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I think that the enthousiasm in the survey results has not had the expected ROI for Borland. With the dot-bomb and the new economy collapse, investments in the Linux OS has gone down as well, except for those who chose Linux to be a strategic weapon against their competitors (IBM vs Microsoft).
Still, the point I want to make is, you need to determine your audience, but be cautious in your investigation methods and don't forget to do the general market watch.
To me it is unclear why the towers collapsed in the first place. If you don't want planes to knock down buildings, you should know why the buildings collapsed...
Was it the explosion?
Was it the weight of the plane?
Was it the destruction of a supporting building structure (ie some pillar)?
Perhaps the presented idea is usefull for the plane not to explode, but that doesn't necesarily mean that the plane can't be a weapon anymore?
I understand that "FastTrack" is a dutch company. I don't know FastTrack, but I do know Holland, *fuck* the DMCA, there is no such thing as DMCA in Holland. Fair use and backup is a right here, so I wonder what will happen. I guess its no use to file ligitation against a dutch company in Los Angeles...
Ahem, try finding out what the sales and download figures were of RedHat, Suse, TurboLinux, Corel and so on...
Now, they're actually operating in the market, so they might be able to give you an idea of whether there -is- a market, where it's a tough market or a free ride.
I've seen it many times, people writing (or saying) that they have nothing to hide...
In my opinion a very naieve statement, as privacy is flushed in the lavatory, you will not have the right to hide anything anymore. So for privacy, goes the same song "there's no sunshine when she's gone...", people probably need to discover for themselves what they have to hide.
Also in my country, there's now the discussion going on about general identification regulations... Note that if introduce that, we're nothing better than the old Sovjet Union. I choose to be prosecuted for this.
I will never give up cash for 100&. Giral money is tracable, while cash money is not. A government can classify anything to be subversive, so there goes your spending freedom. No, I do not trust gouvernments... I want my freedom, privacy and anonymity, I'll use cash!
The restriction on pornography is absurd! In my country this is plain simple: If MS would restrict that, they would not have a legal license. In my country you can do porno if you want to, even with FrontPage, no restriction on that. The contract violates the first law of the constitution "Freedom of speech" so a restriction is completely illegal. In my country, you cannot arrange that in a contract, the law has higher priority.
Suppose that Microsoft would have made a contract saying:
You are restricted to use FrontPage for pornography, unless you kill an Afghan terrorist.
In my country, you cannot arrange a murder by contract legally. This contract, or license has no legal base and is therefore illegal as a whole.
I think your country is a bit the same like mine...
Blame mr. Wheel for inventing the wheel, so that they can move around.
Seriously, in my opinion, the US should blame their own foreign policy for this.
The embargo on Iraq has killed 1.5 million children, who didn't even know they were Iraqy, because of hunger and illnesses. In Europe, there is an action group of former European polticians who protest against this. They asked former US minister of foreign affairs Albright: "Is this the price we want to pay" and she answered "Yes, this is the price we want to pay".
So I'm not a muslim, and I'm surely a western guy from Europe, but in my opinion, I thing that a lot of people can get very angry with stuff like this.
Blaming the inventors of a technology is completely nonsense as any act is caused by comprehension and psycologiocal means.
I really do think that the USA should blame their foreign policy, and the New Zealand gouvernment has said this as well. Perhaps diplomatic processes could transform enemies into friends, taking away the motive to perform terrorist attacks.
How much of transmitted data is random bits, and how much of transmitted data has structure...
I'm positive that more than 99.9% has structure. Who would transmit random bits? Perhaps one of those organizations who'd like to fool the system, but it can't be the lion part.
My guess it's very hard to choose "the best" joke as humor depends on culture. For example, on Slashdot (and in real life too) I find (I think US) humorous remarks, which I don't find very funny - more in the sense of *well, it's okay*.
Personally I'm from The Netherlands, and I tend not to appreciate the dutch humor very much. As a former UK citizen, English humor still has my personal preferences.
Not only the country you live in but also the culture found in your proffession is of significant influence to your sense of humor. For example, ICT-proffessionals have different humor than lawyers, policemen and housewives (may it be obvious that gender determines your sense of humor too).
I'm very curious, also a bit sceptical about the feasibility of this "project".
Slashdot Mirror
I heard that Kily Minoque's first song "I should be so lucky", both music and vocals were written in 15 minutes. It then took only another 30 minutes to record it...
Doesn't this "right" to hack, imply "the right to violate the DMCA"??
's funny. A "serious" programming language lets also redefine everything including keywords. This language is called Rebol and I'm so enthousiastic about it, that I'm busy implementing a GPL'ed version of it. (not on the net yet, still got a lot of work to do).
Terrorism is the new trend, already "used" by Israely PM Sharon to excuse himself for attacking his political opponents (ie Palestinians).
Ofcourse, and this bill gives a free passport, "the fight against terrorism" can be abused to fight your political opponents. A Canadian is not a domestic resident, is he? Nor am I. My fears for abuse come from my distrust in any government...
Not only muslims, also Bhudist in China, Cathlics in the Philippines etc...
Punishment, okay. But are you in any form aware of what these people are actually are angry about?
Your ignorance disappoints me. If we do not want to become the evil ourselves, we need to be thourough, just and objective...
If we "just kill someone", then we're no better than the terrorists themselves, perhaps we even deserve bad treatment.
Still, the economic embargo did not have the desired effect. Cancelling the embargo and finding other ways to push Saddam of the throne can save millions of children. That's why I think that we - the west - can be held responsible for the death of those children, but Albright responded that she didn't care...
Yes I would. I'm a humanist.
In a speech from Osama himself, he declares that the plane attacks on NY, Pentagon and Pennsilvania were retaliations for lots of stuff, including the story I posted above... Even if you agree or disagree with any standpoint, still I think it is unwise to piss millions of people off.
Do you consider the death of 1.5 million Iraqi children as a good price for the good cause?
Live TV from all over the world can be found here: WWITV, I used it to watch Pakistan TV!!!
1.5 million children died because of hunger and sickness due to the embargo. A european action group, protesting against the embargo (and finding *other* ways to push Saddam) has asked former minister Albright "Is this (the dead children) the price we want to pay?" she answered "yes, this is the price we want to pay"
So if I understand well, good is us, and bad is the rest of the world. Killing US citizens is a bad thing, while killing children who don't even knew they were Iraqi is a good thing.
Making people angry - BAD!!
People just want to race, so we destroy the speeding camera's. Here are some pictures. By the way, even Jeremy Clarkson from the BBC program "Top Gear" made a report on these guys...
Camera bashing IS the answer!!!!
In the first place, the author of the article is a "she"... in the second place, correct factual reasons for exclusion are given: punks being rejected (excluded) from the shopping mall. It's not the camera's promoting this exclusion, but the paradigm "once a thief, always a thief". The camera's therefore do not promote exclusion, but utilizes exclusion. Without the camera's, it is unfeasible to uphold exclusion, while the desire might exist. The camera's make such an exclusion feasible, fulfilling an existing desire. Unfortunately, such desires and paradigms are often based on irrational fears. I cannot support systems who'm utilize such irrational fears. The excluded punk may come to the shopping mall with the intention to buy something, even while he shoplifted the week before.
1. The Palestinian 'warriors' are now called terrorists by pm. Sharon. It obviously depends on the side you're on, what you call them right? This is just a simple example of tools and purpose.
2a. Karl Marx wrote a book, trying to make an improvement on the social system. It was later implemented as Leninism, and after it became communism. Although, lots of bad things happened in communistic countries, Karl Marx designed the fundamentals for the system, but did not have the intension for people to loose freedom of speech. Due to the short-sighted people wondering around in governments these days, there will be no second "Karl Marx" even when it's somebody with an grotesk good idea, supposedly some post-democratic idea serving the people better than current democracy itself. KM2 will be labeled as an enemy of the state, and he can be harrassed for minor law violations captured on camera. Maybe you feel comfortable with your gouvernment, but I'd call that rather naieve... The government gets a tool with which they can prevent me having a better idea than they have, about running a nation. Perhaps I have an even simpler idea - a good plan for weapon control... the government can harras me and shut me up using the camera's, because the days of simply shooting "Martin Luther King" are over. You've got to punish these "enemies of the state" the legal way...
2b. When people are excluded, they will repel. Retaliation for such an exclusion will be much more violent than the committed crime used as motive for the exlusion in the first place. My freedoms are taken away if the grounds for such an exclusion are lowered. If they want to put me in place, then I will either emigrate or kill myself - acceptance is no option.
2c. People like me, want to have the right to have something to hide. I won't be hiding a bomb, but I might be hiding simple embarrasing stuff. I want to have the right to be embarresed about things. The camera's threaten this because they take away anonimity, while being in public generates anonimity. Camera's give extra stress. One tends to act different than one actually desires. So my freedoms are taken away as I'm urged to act politely, while the public does not necesary demands this from me. In a free country, I have the right to act as I want, even if some people find this impolite. If that right is taken away from me, I want the right to commit suicide instead of accepting the rules and adapting to those morals and values somebody else has created for me (ie. Cleopatra died this way!)
2d. I don't want some assholes who control the camera, take away my girlfriends innocence and decency because they're looking through they're sneaky camera's like she's a prostitute. Bad thing is, it is recorded, and it may end up in somebody's living room on their wall. If somebody in public takes close-up pictures of her breasts, he will loose his teeth and his eyesight for life. Somebody doing this watching in a sneaky way, can not be punished that easily as we don't know about it. So in this case, the camera takes away my ability to punish assholes. Taking away my ability is the same as taking away my freedom.
Putting people into their place indeed takes away oppertunities. So if you carry the wrong smart-card, you can just as well commit suicide because life has indeed no meaning for you at all.
The fears in the article are extremely exagerated, because the tool is used for the purposes the government has defined, so one should fear his government. Besides that, the fear still is realistic because governments tend to make the obvious 'undesired' decisions in order to fight some recognizable enemy (crime, drugs, terrorism, child porn, insecurity).
The element of exclusion is probably the most dangerous. Suppose a big group is banned from the shopping malls, public areas with clubs and bars, and so on. As they have something in common, these people will probably organize themselves in a place where there are no camera's. They will find ways because they're not stupid...
They might destroy the camera's but they will be - sure - even more violent in their crimes than they would be without the camera's, because the capture risks are higher, so there's more at stake than without the camera's. This could be the scenario of "putting people into their assigned place" when you're talking about a culture who'm does not accept authority like the British do. In a non-acceptance culture (like my culture) the more rules and the more tougher upholding the law gets, the more violent retaliation of criminals will be the community costs.
Here in the Netherlands (and I think this goes for the USA too), excluding people is retaliated by those excluded. So exclusion is in my opinion not even near a solution. If this is the consequence of CCTV systems, this must be greatly considered, as we don't want anymore Timothy McVeighs right? If governments use this tech for the wrong purposes (exclusion), than we'll be fighting terrorism now, but an army of Timothy McVeighs within the next 10 years - not the most preferred gift for your children...
I don't know what the business performance of Borland is with for example "Kylix", but for now, I haven't seen any free software yet, which was made with Kylix (does not mean it doesn't exist) but it makes me believe that their Kylix project was lesser success than intentionally expected.
Before Borland/Inprise started the Kylix project, they published a survey on their site, to investigate market demand. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I think that the enthousiasm in the survey results has not had the expected ROI for Borland. With the dot-bomb and the new economy collapse, investments in the Linux OS has gone down as well, except for those who chose Linux to be a strategic weapon against their competitors (IBM vs Microsoft).
Still, the point I want to make is, you need to determine your audience, but be cautious in your investigation methods and don't forget to do the general market watch.
Was it the explosion?
Was it the weight of the plane?
Was it the destruction of a supporting building structure (ie some pillar)?
Perhaps the presented idea is usefull for the plane not to explode, but that doesn't necesarily mean that the plane can't be a weapon anymore?
I understand that "FastTrack" is a dutch company. I don't know FastTrack, but I do know Holland, *fuck* the DMCA, there is no such thing as DMCA in Holland. Fair use and backup is a right here, so I wonder what will happen. I guess its no use to file ligitation against a dutch company in Los Angeles...
Ahem, try finding out what the sales and download figures were of RedHat, Suse, TurboLinux, Corel and so on...
Now, they're actually operating in the market, so they might be able to give you an idea of whether there -is- a market, where it's a tough market or a free ride.
Good luck!
In my opinion a very naieve statement, as privacy is flushed in the lavatory, you will not have the right to hide anything anymore. So for privacy, goes the same song "there's no sunshine when she's gone...", people probably need to discover for themselves what they have to hide.
Also in my country, there's now the discussion going on about general identification regulations... Note that if introduce that, we're nothing better than the old Sovjet Union. I choose to be prosecuted for this.
I will never give up cash for 100&. Giral money is tracable, while cash money is not. A government can classify anything to be subversive, so there goes your spending freedom. No, I do not trust gouvernments... I want my freedom, privacy and anonymity, I'll use cash!
Suppose that Microsoft would have made a contract saying:
You are restricted to use FrontPage for pornography, unless you kill an Afghan terrorist.
In my country, you cannot arrange a murder by contract legally. This contract, or license has no legal base and is therefore illegal as a whole.
I think your country is a bit the same like mine...
Seriously, in my opinion, the US should blame their own foreign policy for this.
The embargo on Iraq has killed 1.5 million children, who didn't even know they were Iraqy, because of hunger and illnesses. In Europe, there is an action group of former European polticians who protest against this. They asked former US minister of foreign affairs Albright: "Is this the price we want to pay" and she answered "Yes, this is the price we want to pay".
So I'm not a muslim, and I'm surely a western guy from Europe, but in my opinion, I thing that a lot of people can get very angry with stuff like this.
Blaming the inventors of a technology is completely nonsense as any act is caused by comprehension and psycologiocal means.
I really do think that the USA should blame their foreign policy, and the New Zealand gouvernment has said this as well. Perhaps diplomatic processes could transform enemies into friends, taking away the motive to perform terrorist attacks.
How much of transmitted data is random bits, and how much of transmitted data has structure...
I'm positive that more than 99.9% has structure. Who would transmit random bits? Perhaps one of those organizations who'd like to fool the system, but it can't be the lion part.
Personally I'm from The Netherlands, and I tend not to appreciate the dutch humor very much. As a former UK citizen, English humor still has my personal preferences.
Not only the country you live in but also the culture found in your proffession is of significant influence to your sense of humor. For example, ICT-proffessionals have different humor than lawyers, policemen and housewives (may it be obvious that gender determines your sense of humor too).
I'm very curious, also a bit sceptical about the feasibility of this "project".