That's how M$, who has their hands in Dell's pockets, does things. If you "want" Windows, meaning you probably have a "need" because you are locked into their whole proprietary game, M$ will then make you pay an assload. If you don't care though, or especially if you *don't* want Windows, it's those people M$ wants to go after. It's just software, it's easily copyable, so M$ doesn't lose anything to someone who wouldn't have paid to begin with. The more people they can have using it though, the more the market will be proprietary in their favor, and more software will be made for it, further helping them monopolize the market. It's win-win. So, of *course* you can't buy a Dell computer without Windows. I tried on their website and you have to choose a version of Windows to get with your computer. There is "no OS" option, for people who might want to save money, or install something else, or install their own copy of Windows even. I chatted with a rep and told them I would buy my computer elsewhere or simply build it myself so that I could save money by having a free OS instead.:)
This is complete BS. Are you a lawyer? "I feel as though Tim Spengler ripped me off." instead of "Tim Spengler is a bloody thief!" Lets see, you added "bloody" which some people would consider a swear word, and instead of "ripped me off" you put "thief", and you were nicer in the first one by saying "I feel as though". Well, obviously you feel it, otherwise you wouldn't be saying it. After saying "he ripped me off!" you could say "How dare you! Where's the proof of that?", and after saying "he's a bloody thief!" you could say "How dare you! Where's the proof of that?" In either case, you are calling him a thief, but the definition doesn't matter as much as the fact that you're saying the same thing. Just because you used "thief" instead of "he ripped me off" means in the first case you HAVE to follow it up with "evidence"? Libel has to be one of the single most moronic laws ever, and completely contradicts freedom of speech.
Unless, of course, it turns out to suck. It's not even out yet. How much were you paid?:P Not to be a troll but that's a little overboard. Maybe you are new to the game industry, but good graphics and an interesting concept doesn't mean good gameplay, or more importantly, fun to play. It just means good graphics. You can say "ooh good graphics" but not "ooh good game" before you've even played it, that's insane. (Unless the graphics is pre-rendered, like some still is though less now days, or completely scripted, which many 'previews' still are.) They are primarily marketing the game concepts. If it's actually fun or not remains to be seen. On top of that, replayability? Frustration level? Too easy? Gets boring? There's a LOT to making a game that's actually fun. We'll see.
Yes, since of course at the time, everyone was recording the daily shown and broadcast to everyone in every city of the US Star Trek episodes off their local TV station and then SHARING it with others! *gasp* Over dial-up! Evilllll!
If you've been listening to the post-911 Bushisms you should know that you are NEVER safe, remember? We're on CODE ORAGE right now in fact, you should be running around screaming because there's a terrorist RIGHT BEHIND YOU, AAAAAAH!!!! http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=29
Spying/eavesdropping/wiretapping? That's just the Patriot Act, come on. You guys made it legal yourselves, and now you're complaining when others do it back to you? Maybe I'm concerned about terrorists running this country, so I should be able to eavesdrop on all government communications. That's the same fantastic excuse you guys use, fair is fair.
You can play ancient games on hundreds of different emulators, yet because you're too lazy to hook your computer to your TV means you'll pay M$ a few bucks just so you won't have to put down your 360 controller? Isn't that just a little bit sad? This is slashdot! You're supposed to have everything networked to everything else in your homes and have it all accessible from anywhere outside of your homes as well! What kind of geeks are you?!:)
You make a good point, and I understand it, but I already did. Yes, secrets will help give you the upper hand over your enemies. So rather than just not sharing information about an attack planned for the next day, you could not share encryption information, and lots of other things as well, because doing so will give you even more cards in your hand. If you go even further with that idea, you could pretty much seal off everything that happens anywhere at anytime, because it ALL could in some way give a potential current or future enemy knowledge that they could use for their advantage. The phrase "it's a matter of national security" is a well-known one. The problem is, and I know you aren't saying there isn't a problem, but it can and has been used by governments to cover up oppressive secrets. I know this is a fantasy, but it's too bad the U.S. won't stand up against war by having a no-secrets policy. Having secrets creates tension and leads to misunderstanding and war. Not having secrets means you have a fair and free system where anyone can look at what is going on and voice their opinion. Not having secrets means your enemy has several less reasons to not like you. It makes you more of a friend rather than a shady neighbor. I wish all countries would adopt to be more free and friendly by adopting such a policy. Then, if someone were to go to war against you, everyone could more easily say "hey, they didn't do anything wrong, and they've got nothing to hide" and could be more likely to help you and join your cause. Sure, I'm probably attacking an effect and not a cause here, but I think it'd help, and our current setup sucks.
Spontaneous thought: Why do we think? What motivates us to keep thinking when we don't have a task to solve, or a logical process to follow?
Easy. Normal programs are given a task to perform and then stop. Animals are special because the process never stops until death or some similar state. Animals need to continue to assimilate input because survival is a continuous process. As such, one of the requirements for an "AI" is to mimic this by not shutting down and continuing to receive and process inputs.
Associative memory: What element of our memory structure allows us to make prescient associations on the fly? Not just "green is a color, and so is blue," but "this song reminds me of one time when I was eating ice cream?"
To simulate the complex physical arrangement and communication of the neural net will certainly take some work, and I'm not pretending to know how this will be done, but links to all related subjects/feelings need to be created by all information that is inputted, while events that aren't of concern to the base programming are dissolved.
Creativity: Why are we good at coming up with surprising and unexpected insights? Modern AI tries this by billions and trillions of fumbling attempts to introduce randomness - but most of them are rubbish. But this is like evolution - which takes thousands or millions of years to innovate (randomly, clumsily) - and not like creative engineering.
It's the same thing as learning, IMHO, and nothing magical (since many seem to want to claim that and they're usually hypocrites by doing so). If you can have an AI actually learn a language while operating on it's real-time programming and learn through association, or in other words have a basic AI that actually can associate and learn, then this so called "creativity" is the same thing as that and the AI will be capable of it. Often "creativity" is helped along by an external accident, but if there is no "learning" ability there to begin with, and no association programming, then no amount of randomness is going to create "creativity". Like I said though, it's a BS word associated to "amazing" instances of learning.
Emotion: We don't understand emotion at all. We've identified regions of the brain in which emotions occur, and particular hormones and hormone receptors that are involved. That's about it. The neurological basis of emotion remains a mystery.
Last but not least the most-often claimed "magical" part of intelligence next to "soul" and the like. Emotion is the base programming. All things get jump-started by this base program. It's the basis of all desire and purpose and the reason why all other things are thought about. It says: "Care about this, this, and these things here." The program starts, those things are sought, the program runs until the system is shut down. It constantly runs, monitoring several different gauges: hunger, sleep, sex, safety, etc. Those core things drive the emergent properties of learning (creativity) and dozens of others that we all see. The key to AI is to of course create a good core program that once started will incorporate additional information and skill based upon its core driving forces in order for it to temporarily accomplish it's "wants". I am hungry, what can I do to satisfy that problem. I learned what can satisfy it now. I'm bored of it, I will learn something new now.
I'm not pretending to know the answers, I'm no programmer myself, but there's just some ideas for everyone to think about or comment on if they care to.
AI isn't a magical thing. Cave men thought that about fire, and just because it's hard to see how animal's brains work doesn't mean there are magical spirit cosmo nodes implanted inside us by some superawesomeincredible race, or whatever you want to make up.:P
As in, no strong AI in 100 years, no strong AI ever -- not created by human intelligence at any rate.
That's the biggest copout ever. Anyone who claims to know eactly when there will be AIs "as good as" humans or any other particular animal IS trying to sell you something. Just as you cannot claim that, you also cannot claim it will never come to pass. It simply *isn't known*. There is no "formula" that you're going to figure out that will let you know if it can or can't happen, or when. No matter how long you think or study philosophy. You're a lot better off thinking about how and why you think to help solve the problem.
PS: Also, think about what it is you're even trying to create. I personally think good AI creation is very possible. If you think it, you can make it, with computers.:)
An idiot would read it and think "what idiots!" not realising that it's really displaying the much bigger problem in the US: Citizens like you willingly giving up your right to not be unfairly held or accused based off your opinion of dislike towards a particular someone or group, letting others steal your freedom of speech. Maybe you're used to locker room immaturity or grew up in a rough neighborhood, but even if you "offend your majesty" with a negative opinion, they don't have a right to attack you for it or harrass you in the grown-up world. That's taking several leaps backwards into midevil times which I sometimes feel we're living in. History does indeed repeat itself.
Somewhat off topic, but it's the bigger picture I think.
Before it was if "God" (preachers) said so, it must be true. It's your right and duty to get it done, whichever way possible. All the license plates that say "support our troops" and "God bless America", that's what they are all saying. If you don't support the US decision by Bush to invade Iraq, or be fully supportive of everything our current administration does, then you're opposing America, God, and homemade old-fashioned traditional apple pie. So of course morons like this want such a bill to be passed. Or how about, going back even further, the Crusades, or how about Nazi Germany. I'm not saying it's the same thing obviously, but it has the same kind of zelot mindset behind it. Everyone knows this if you've been living in the US since 911.
Also painful is the fact that the whole concept opposes the very core ideas of the way the US government was set up. Major change won't occur unless you get people so pissed off that they shout revolution, so the Constitution was meant to lag behind a ways until there was enough protest for change. The people in Iraq clearly weren't pissed off enough yet to have their own revolution, and we CERTAINLY shouldn't MAKE them have one. That's contradictory to it's own definition. I have little doubt in my mind that in the future (if not already) Bush will be known as one of the worst presidents ever in dozens of ways.
All citizens should have the right to know what their leaders know. Anything less isn't fair. The only reason for secrecy is perhaps during times of war, when and where the next attack will occur. Doing anything to get an upper hand against an enemy is naturally sought, but a government isn't or shouldn't be at war with it's citizens. Hiding truths only slows the progress of intelligence and breeds ignorance.
Moving away from fossil fuels may be for the greater good but we can't forget about the side effects that will have.
It will have great side effects. Everyone working in the oil industry will move over to the alternatives industries. "Creating jobs" isn't the holy grail, but making so there is less work to be done is also good. It means less people working, which makes all goods everywhere cheaper, which means you won't have to earn as much money to buy the things you need. Money is simply a placeholder so that we don't have to exchange the actual goods and services that we create. If the only product that was needed or existed was material replicators, effectively wiping out the majority of all the other markets currently in our system, that wouldn't mean death and starvation for all, it would mean everyone would do a whole lot less work and food and other material goods would be dirt cheap so that even the slightest amount of work would yield a comfortable lifestyle.
And small stores can survive and even thrive with Wal-Mart because of the proximity effect. Stores physically close to Wal-Mart actually get more business after Wal-Mart moves in. Stores do, however, have to specialize and carry the stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't. Wal-Mart has to cater to general audiences, so it can only provide the most common basic needs in any category. A hardware store does just fine with Wal-Mart next door because it carries lots of stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't and can't---screws and fasteners, higher quality tools, possibly building materials, etc. A clothing store does just fine because teenagers want brand names. And so on.
Ace Hardware sells tools that are usually a lot better in quality than Wal-Mart. It's interesting how Target has competed by offering many of the same brands as Wal-Mart, but unfortunately usually at higher prices. I get most all my food at ALDI which is close by to the local Wal-Mart here that sells food at prices cheaper than Wal-Mart. They do so by cutting overhead costs even more than Wal-Mart with the use of some smart tactics. Their selection isn't as big, so I go shopping at Wal-Mart for the things I want that I can't buy there. Yay for competition that's unhindered by the government! Now, if only the RIAA would learn they're going to have to change their business model and can't rely on Uncle Sam to wage the losing war to save their dying market nitch.
This software is free, which means they might not have known about it or had the capability before of using software that does this stuff. The fact that he's showing them NEW SOFTWARE, regardless of whether or not it's closed or open source, is a GOOD thing. A free 30 minute training period in the use of powerful software? I would have given him positive feedback too. If they didn't want to have him show them new programs they can just say no thanks. If they are already using a paid program that does the same thing he's showing them, then they'd say "I already have something that can do that." Come on people, this isn't religion, and he didn't say he was forcing it in their face.
Cliff, my recommendation is to not get deep into the politics behind it either, unless they show some obvious interest, of course. Otherwise it might come across as being too pressuring, as I'm sure you already knew. I would start off by simply using the "free" angle. It's free! So this is software you can be running, I'll even install it for you or give you the installation packages. I'll even show you the basics of how to use it, free of charge! I'm sure your costomers would love you for trying to be helpful. If they wanted to know more, you could explain to them about the community behind it, how free/OS software exists, etc. I work for a school district as a tech and I can tell you that the fact it is free and accessable to all (including the students) is a major plus for anyone. I'm sure they will thank you for showing them a "computer secret" that they can share with their friends as well. Heck, you could even show them some good websites that would keep them up to date on OSS that they might be interested in.
Let them have all their own software! Let them use only their own proprietary formats! Let them force users to install programs they don't want, spyware they don't want, "security updates" they don't want, that would be GOOD! Then they will be SO horrible that everyone will hate them, and switch to other, non-intrusive, FRIENDLY OSes! Let full laze-fair competition destroy their monopolistic greedy schemes by letting them be so visible that everyone will see them and will then know they don't want to touch them with a ten foot pole. Ultimately, consumers will win, because they don't like to get raped. Well, most of them.
(soapbox)The only real threat that needs to be stood up against are patents that attempt to control our access to new technologies, including ideas/software. So long as consumers can always use Firefox for instance, they will never want to use IE if it only comes on an OS that's big and bloated and cost $400 and invasive and loaded with DRM. As long as ideas aren't controlled, consumers can just look into alternate competitive software.(/soapbox)
How about a fusion power plant instead like what is being built in France? A technology that the electric industry seems to enjoy ignoring, since they would hate excess energy and much lower energy costs for consumers. Yes, the pro-capitalistic laws in the US will ultimately leave it years behind in technology (and already has) at the expense of it's citizens.
Sell cheaper data storage using the latest in storage technology? Nah. Lets buy up all the patents to control the market, then sit on our butts and slowly leak the technology into the market in small increments, all the while charging tons for the "highest" storage, slowly milking the consumers. The oil industry still has some oil left to mine from Alaska and Iraq, so you can't have your pure electric cars until they've taken all the money they can. Oil: Good to the last drop.:)
God damn dude, when will you understand that you both agree. What Spun is trying to say though is that certain people ARE smarter than others, many are "gearheads", etc. Some people are "dumb", and you are right that the person attempting this Gentoo install probably didn't follow the directions well enough because *usually* they work. However, saying that he is "dumb" (like I just did, just for example) is also calling MOST people out there dumb. Most people don't know enough about computers to just do the (what is simple in your eyes) installation, nor will many be willing to spend the time it takes to do a Gentoo installation that involves so much typing. Call them what you will, but the fact is, some like/want to do it, some don't. Don't dis someone just because they didn't like trying to install Gentoo. That's completely OK! It's not for him, he needs an easier distro with easier instructions, apparently!:) Whether or not he gave it a "fair" try in your opinion isn't important, because I'm sure he DID. I'm sure when he went "I'm going to install Gentoo!" he was serious. He actually attempted to do so. YES he fucked up, YES there are definite reasons WHY he fucked up, but that's not the point. The point is Gentoo clearly wasn't for him regardless of the particular type of braincells that he lacked to get it installed right. You probably agree on this point now, and it's the point Spun was trying to get across. Some people like and are ABLE to perform more challenging (what THEY see as challenging) Linux installations. Some are not and have to go with Ubuntu. Hell, I know several people who couldn't even install Ubuntu, they don't even know what an OS is! They wouldn't know they needed to reboot the computer after putting in the CD! They just get their computers from Dell and turn it on and use what's there! So, drop it! =D
By the way, Spun, you get hot and fresh ROFFLEWAFFLES for your origional post, whenever you want them, I'll just keep them here for you.
Shhh, you're giving away M$'s (as well as other company's) secrets! Hardware is linked to software, because you have to use software to run the hardware. Software is linked to, well, simple ideas. But ideas are freely available! So what's the best way to monopolize a market? Control the ideas, to control the software, to control the hardware, and control the WORLD, MWUHAHAHA!!! Ahem. So, yes, it's no surprise patent/copyright control is the main focus of many a monopoly, and so it's no surprise Cisco has done a lot with software developement. I'm sure Cisco is busy working on ways of trying to prevent FOSS from operating with it's phones right now!
Slashdot Mirror
That's how M$, who has their hands in Dell's pockets, does things. If you "want" Windows, meaning you probably have a "need" because you are locked into their whole proprietary game, M$ will then make you pay an assload. If you don't care though, or especially if you *don't* want Windows, it's those people M$ wants to go after. It's just software, it's easily copyable, so M$ doesn't lose anything to someone who wouldn't have paid to begin with. The more people they can have using it though, the more the market will be proprietary in their favor, and more software will be made for it, further helping them monopolize the market. It's win-win. So, of *course* you can't buy a Dell computer without Windows. I tried on their website and you have to choose a version of Windows to get with your computer. There is "no OS" option, for people who might want to save money, or install something else, or install their own copy of Windows even. I chatted with a rep and told them I would buy my computer elsewhere or simply build it myself so that I could save money by having a free OS instead. :)
This is complete BS. Are you a lawyer? "I feel as though Tim Spengler ripped me off." instead of "Tim Spengler is a bloody thief!" Lets see, you added "bloody" which some people would consider a swear word, and instead of "ripped me off" you put "thief", and you were nicer in the first one by saying "I feel as though". Well, obviously you feel it, otherwise you wouldn't be saying it. After saying "he ripped me off!" you could say "How dare you! Where's the proof of that?", and after saying "he's a bloody thief!" you could say "How dare you! Where's the proof of that?" In either case, you are calling him a thief, but the definition doesn't matter as much as the fact that you're saying the same thing. Just because you used "thief" instead of "he ripped me off" means in the first case you HAVE to follow it up with "evidence"? Libel has to be one of the single most moronic laws ever, and completely contradicts freedom of speech.
Unless, of course, it turns out to suck. It's not even out yet. How much were you paid? :P Not to be a troll but that's a little overboard. Maybe you are new to the game industry, but good graphics and an interesting concept doesn't mean good gameplay, or more importantly, fun to play. It just means good graphics. You can say "ooh good graphics" but not "ooh good game" before you've even played it, that's insane. (Unless the graphics is pre-rendered, like some still is though less now days, or completely scripted, which many 'previews' still are.) They are primarily marketing the game concepts. If it's actually fun or not remains to be seen. On top of that, replayability? Frustration level? Too easy? Gets boring? There's a LOT to making a game that's actually fun. We'll see.
"...to a high-end Lexus that can virtually park itself."
Wouldn't you prefer a car that would *actually* park itself, not just park itself in VR?
Yes, since of course at the time, everyone was recording the daily shown and broadcast to everyone in every city of the US Star Trek episodes off their local TV station and then SHARING it with others! *gasp* Over dial-up! Evilllll!
If you've been listening to the post-911 Bushisms you should know that you are NEVER safe, remember? We're on CODE ORAGE right now in fact, you should be running around screaming because there's a terrorist RIGHT BEHIND YOU, AAAAAAH!!!! http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=29
Spying/eavesdropping/wiretapping? That's just the Patriot Act, come on. You guys made it legal yourselves, and now you're complaining when others do it back to you? Maybe I'm concerned about terrorists running this country, so I should be able to eavesdrop on all government communications. That's the same fantastic excuse you guys use, fair is fair.
You can play ancient games on hundreds of different emulators, yet because you're too lazy to hook your computer to your TV means you'll pay M$ a few bucks just so you won't have to put down your 360 controller? Isn't that just a little bit sad? This is slashdot! You're supposed to have everything networked to everything else in your homes and have it all accessible from anywhere outside of your homes as well! What kind of geeks are you?! :)
Or maybe they're just acknowledging the fact that there are gods people believe in other than the Christian one =)
Then I want my money back.
You make a good point, and I understand it, but I already did. Yes, secrets will help give you the upper hand over your enemies. So rather than just not sharing information about an attack planned for the next day, you could not share encryption information, and lots of other things as well, because doing so will give you even more cards in your hand. If you go even further with that idea, you could pretty much seal off everything that happens anywhere at anytime, because it ALL could in some way give a potential current or future enemy knowledge that they could use for their advantage. The phrase "it's a matter of national security" is a well-known one. The problem is, and I know you aren't saying there isn't a problem, but it can and has been used by governments to cover up oppressive secrets. I know this is a fantasy, but it's too bad the U.S. won't stand up against war by having a no-secrets policy. Having secrets creates tension and leads to misunderstanding and war. Not having secrets means you have a fair and free system where anyone can look at what is going on and voice their opinion. Not having secrets means your enemy has several less reasons to not like you. It makes you more of a friend rather than a shady neighbor. I wish all countries would adopt to be more free and friendly by adopting such a policy. Then, if someone were to go to war against you, everyone could more easily say "hey, they didn't do anything wrong, and they've got nothing to hide" and could be more likely to help you and join your cause. Sure, I'm probably attacking an effect and not a cause here, but I think it'd help, and our current setup sucks.
My two yen:
Spontaneous thought: Why do we think? What motivates us to keep thinking when we don't have a task to solve, or a logical process to follow?
Easy. Normal programs are given a task to perform and then stop. Animals are special because the process never stops until death or some similar state. Animals need to continue to assimilate input because survival is a continuous process. As such, one of the requirements for an "AI" is to mimic this by not shutting down and continuing to receive and process inputs.
Associative memory: What element of our memory structure allows us to make prescient associations on the fly? Not just "green is a color, and so is blue," but "this song reminds me of one time when I was eating ice cream?"
To simulate the complex physical arrangement and communication of the neural net will certainly take some work, and I'm not pretending to know how this will be done, but links to all related subjects/feelings need to be created by all information that is inputted, while events that aren't of concern to the base programming are dissolved.
Creativity: Why are we good at coming up with surprising and unexpected insights? Modern AI tries this by billions and trillions of fumbling attempts to introduce randomness - but most of them are rubbish. But this is like evolution - which takes thousands or millions of years to innovate (randomly, clumsily) - and not like creative engineering.
It's the same thing as learning, IMHO, and nothing magical (since many seem to want to claim that and they're usually hypocrites by doing so). If you can have an AI actually learn a language while operating on it's real-time programming and learn through association, or in other words have a basic AI that actually can associate and learn, then this so called "creativity" is the same thing as that and the AI will be capable of it. Often "creativity" is helped along by an external accident, but if there is no "learning" ability there to begin with, and no association programming, then no amount of randomness is going to create "creativity". Like I said though, it's a BS word associated to "amazing" instances of learning.
Emotion: We don't understand emotion at all. We've identified regions of the brain in which emotions occur, and particular hormones and hormone receptors that are involved. That's about it. The neurological basis of emotion remains a mystery.
Last but not least the most-often claimed "magical" part of intelligence next to "soul" and the like. Emotion is the base programming. All things get jump-started by this base program. It's the basis of all desire and purpose and the reason why all other things are thought about. It says: "Care about this, this, and these things here." The program starts, those things are sought, the program runs until the system is shut down. It constantly runs, monitoring several different gauges: hunger, sleep, sex, safety, etc. Those core things drive the emergent properties of learning (creativity) and dozens of others that we all see. The key to AI is to of course create a good core program that once started will incorporate additional information and skill based upon its core driving forces in order for it to temporarily accomplish it's "wants". I am hungry, what can I do to satisfy that problem. I learned what can satisfy it now. I'm bored of it, I will learn something new now.
I'm not pretending to know the answers, I'm no programmer myself, but there's just some ideas for everyone to think about or comment on if they care to.
AI isn't a magical thing. Cave men thought that about fire, and just because it's hard to see how animal's brains work doesn't mean there are magical spirit cosmo nodes implanted inside us by some superawesomeincredible race, or whatever you want to make up. :P
As in, no strong AI in 100 years, no strong AI ever -- not created by human intelligence at any rate.
That's the biggest copout ever. Anyone who claims to know eactly when there will be AIs "as good as" humans or any other particular animal IS trying to sell you something. Just as you cannot claim that, you also cannot claim it will never come to pass. It simply *isn't known*. There is no "formula" that you're going to figure out that will let you know if it can or can't happen, or when. No matter how long you think or study philosophy. You're a lot better off thinking about how and why you think to help solve the problem.
PS: Also, think about what it is you're even trying to create. I personally think good AI creation is very possible. If you think it, you can make it, with computers. :)
An idiot would read it and think "what idiots!" not realising that it's really displaying the much bigger problem in the US: Citizens like you willingly giving up your right to not be unfairly held or accused based off your opinion of dislike towards a particular someone or group, letting others steal your freedom of speech. Maybe you're used to locker room immaturity or grew up in a rough neighborhood, but even if you "offend your majesty" with a negative opinion, they don't have a right to attack you for it or harrass you in the grown-up world. That's taking several leaps backwards into midevil times which I sometimes feel we're living in. History does indeed repeat itself.
Somewhat off topic, but it's the bigger picture I think.
Before it was if "God" (preachers) said so, it must be true. It's your right and duty to get it done, whichever way possible. All the license plates that say "support our troops" and "God bless America", that's what they are all saying. If you don't support the US decision by Bush to invade Iraq, or be fully supportive of everything our current administration does, then you're opposing America, God, and homemade old-fashioned traditional apple pie. So of course morons like this want such a bill to be passed. Or how about, going back even further, the Crusades, or how about Nazi Germany. I'm not saying it's the same thing obviously, but it has the same kind of zelot mindset behind it. Everyone knows this if you've been living in the US since 911.
Also painful is the fact that the whole concept opposes the very core ideas of the way the US government was set up. Major change won't occur unless you get people so pissed off that they shout revolution, so the Constitution was meant to lag behind a ways until there was enough protest for change. The people in Iraq clearly weren't pissed off enough yet to have their own revolution, and we CERTAINLY shouldn't MAKE them have one. That's contradictory to it's own definition. I have little doubt in my mind that in the future (if not already) Bush will be known as one of the worst presidents ever in dozens of ways.
All citizens should have the right to know what their leaders know. Anything less isn't fair. The only reason for secrecy is perhaps during times of war, when and where the next attack will occur. Doing anything to get an upper hand against an enemy is naturally sought, but a government isn't or shouldn't be at war with it's citizens. Hiding truths only slows the progress of intelligence and breeds ignorance.
Moving away from fossil fuels may be for the greater good but we can't forget about the side effects that will have.
It will have great side effects. Everyone working in the oil industry will move over to the alternatives industries. "Creating jobs" isn't the holy grail, but making so there is less work to be done is also good. It means less people working, which makes all goods everywhere cheaper, which means you won't have to earn as much money to buy the things you need. Money is simply a placeholder so that we don't have to exchange the actual goods and services that we create. If the only product that was needed or existed was material replicators, effectively wiping out the majority of all the other markets currently in our system, that wouldn't mean death and starvation for all, it would mean everyone would do a whole lot less work and food and other material goods would be dirt cheap so that even the slightest amount of work would yield a comfortable lifestyle.
And small stores can survive and even thrive with Wal-Mart because of the proximity effect. Stores physically close to Wal-Mart actually get more business after Wal-Mart moves in. Stores do, however, have to specialize and carry the stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't. Wal-Mart has to cater to general audiences, so it can only provide the most common basic needs in any category. A hardware store does just fine with Wal-Mart next door because it carries lots of stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't and can't---screws and fasteners, higher quality tools, possibly building materials, etc. A clothing store does just fine because teenagers want brand names. And so on.
Ace Hardware sells tools that are usually a lot better in quality than Wal-Mart. It's interesting how Target has competed by offering many of the same brands as Wal-Mart, but unfortunately usually at higher prices. I get most all my food at ALDI which is close by to the local Wal-Mart here that sells food at prices cheaper than Wal-Mart. They do so by cutting overhead costs even more than Wal-Mart with the use of some smart tactics. Their selection isn't as big, so I go shopping at Wal-Mart for the things I want that I can't buy there. Yay for competition that's unhindered by the government! Now, if only the RIAA would learn they're going to have to change their business model and can't rely on Uncle Sam to wage the losing war to save their dying market nitch.
This software is free, which means they might not have known about it or had the capability before of using software that does this stuff. The fact that he's showing them NEW SOFTWARE, regardless of whether or not it's closed or open source, is a GOOD thing. A free 30 minute training period in the use of powerful software? I would have given him positive feedback too. If they didn't want to have him show them new programs they can just say no thanks. If they are already using a paid program that does the same thing he's showing them, then they'd say "I already have something that can do that." Come on people, this isn't religion, and he didn't say he was forcing it in their face.
Cliff, my recommendation is to not get deep into the politics behind it either, unless they show some obvious interest, of course. Otherwise it might come across as being too pressuring, as I'm sure you already knew. I would start off by simply using the "free" angle. It's free! So this is software you can be running, I'll even install it for you or give you the installation packages. I'll even show you the basics of how to use it, free of charge! I'm sure your costomers would love you for trying to be helpful. If they wanted to know more, you could explain to them about the community behind it, how free/OS software exists, etc. I work for a school district as a tech and I can tell you that the fact it is free and accessable to all (including the students) is a major plus for anyone. I'm sure they will thank you for showing them a "computer secret" that they can share with their friends as well. Heck, you could even show them some good websites that would keep them up to date on OSS that they might be interested in.
Let them have all their own software! Let them use only their own proprietary formats! Let them force users to install programs they don't want, spyware they don't want, "security updates" they don't want, that would be GOOD! Then they will be SO horrible that everyone will hate them, and switch to other, non-intrusive, FRIENDLY OSes! Let full laze-fair competition destroy their monopolistic greedy schemes by letting them be so visible that everyone will see them and will then know they don't want to touch them with a ten foot pole. Ultimately, consumers will win, because they don't like to get raped. Well, most of them.
(soapbox)The only real threat that needs to be stood up against are patents that attempt to control our access to new technologies, including ideas/software. So long as consumers can always use Firefox for instance, they will never want to use IE if it only comes on an OS that's big and bloated and cost $400 and invasive and loaded with DRM. As long as ideas aren't controlled, consumers can just look into alternate competitive software.(/soapbox)
The president's actions in a country does not necessarily reflect the citizen's ideals? Preposterous! All stereotypes are 100% correct!
How about a fusion power plant instead like what is being built in France? A technology that the electric industry seems to enjoy ignoring, since they would hate excess energy and much lower energy costs for consumers. Yes, the pro-capitalistic laws in the US will ultimately leave it years behind in technology (and already has) at the expense of it's citizens.
Sell cheaper data storage using the latest in storage technology? Nah. Lets buy up all the patents to control the market, then sit on our butts and slowly leak the technology into the market in small increments, all the while charging tons for the "highest" storage, slowly milking the consumers. The oil industry still has some oil left to mine from Alaska and Iraq, so you can't have your pure electric cars until they've taken all the money they can. Oil: Good to the last drop. :)
It's too bad he didn't save the letter. That would be awesome to have scanned and put on the net.
God damn dude, when will you understand that you both agree. What Spun is trying to say though is that certain people ARE smarter than others, many are "gearheads", etc. Some people are "dumb", and you are right that the person attempting this Gentoo install probably didn't follow the directions well enough because *usually* they work. However, saying that he is "dumb" (like I just did, just for example) is also calling MOST people out there dumb. Most people don't know enough about computers to just do the (what is simple in your eyes) installation, nor will many be willing to spend the time it takes to do a Gentoo installation that involves so much typing. Call them what you will, but the fact is, some like/want to do it, some don't. Don't dis someone just because they didn't like trying to install Gentoo. That's completely OK! It's not for him, he needs an easier distro with easier instructions, apparently! :) Whether or not he gave it a "fair" try in your opinion isn't important, because I'm sure he DID. I'm sure when he went "I'm going to install Gentoo!" he was serious. He actually attempted to do so. YES he fucked up, YES there are definite reasons WHY he fucked up, but that's not the point. The point is Gentoo clearly wasn't for him regardless of the particular type of braincells that he lacked to get it installed right. You probably agree on this point now, and it's the point Spun was trying to get across. Some people like and are ABLE to perform more challenging (what THEY see as challenging) Linux installations. Some are not and have to go with Ubuntu. Hell, I know several people who couldn't even install Ubuntu, they don't even know what an OS is! They wouldn't know they needed to reboot the computer after putting in the CD! They just get their computers from Dell and turn it on and use what's there! So, drop it! =D
By the way, Spun, you get hot and fresh ROFFLEWAFFLES for your origional post, whenever you want them, I'll just keep them here for you.
Shhh, you're giving away M$'s (as well as other company's) secrets! Hardware is linked to software, because you have to use software to run the hardware. Software is linked to, well, simple ideas. But ideas are freely available! So what's the best way to monopolize a market? Control the ideas, to control the software, to control the hardware, and control the WORLD, MWUHAHAHA!!! Ahem. So, yes, it's no surprise patent/copyright control is the main focus of many a monopoly, and so it's no surprise Cisco has done a lot with software developement. I'm sure Cisco is busy working on ways of trying to prevent FOSS from operating with it's phones right now!