I remember hearing that the planet was running out of fossil fuels faster than it was producing them. I also remember hear the inverse of that later on. I was wondering if anyone could give me a definite answer. Are we consuming more than the world can produce? Is there a balance?
"When evil is ahead, and you don't have any arms - you've got to get a leg up!"
I can't wait for this to come out. The Tick is on of my all-time favorite animated series (right next to Attack of the Killer Tomatoes and Eek! The Cat).
Recently, I was in a conversation with a person who comes from a very distinct background from mine. We were discussing your articles and how they (and consequently yourself) were hated passionately by slashdot readers. I do not believe that every Katz sentence is gospel, but in the general sense you are usual dead right. My friend and I had both come to the conclusion that it was probably because many slashdot readers didn't want to hear the truth. What is your perspective on their hatred of you. PS. I enjoyed how you not only made your point with the Please Die articles, but also used the slashdot forum to PROVE it.
I would like to thank you for pointing out why you did not agree with any of my proposals. Quite frankly, I would not like for any of them to go into place myself. In fact, I am not at all bothered by the amount of hostility on the internet. I do as another slashdot reader stated and ignore the comments I don't like.
I wanted to point out the fact that the only way to change the internet is to enforce that change. There are a lot of people on the internet, and if they wish for a non-hostile environment, then I am all for that. If they wish to leave things the same way they have always been then thats just fine with me as well. I'm not too picky.
I was simply offering people who wanted a non-hostile environment (i'll call them the gentle people) a few suggestions. The internet would be a terrible place without a few gentle souls, and I would hate to lose them.
Thank you also for pointing out my use of the word "we" when it should be "we americans." I forgot my audience.
It seems to me that quite often we tend to confuse the ideas of freedom and anarchy. The freedom that we were given when our country was founded, was given through a set of rules. A constitution and a bill of rights (rules) defined the boundries of social interaction. This set of rules formed what we call freedom. By restricting ourselves from hostile and unfair behavior, we became the home of liberty. If there had been no system of law set up, and america had become a land of anarchy, we would definitely see one of the most hostile environments anywhere. It would be probably like those old road warrior movies. So what am I getting at? What am I trying to say? That if we want an online community that creates a non-hostile environment we must be willing to endure some form of regulation. There must be some basic rules, maybe even an internet bill of rights, that must be set up. Freedom only lives when it is protected by a fair system of rules. Without rules, anarchy lives and freedom disappears. So you must choose freedom or anarchy. Regulation or a hostile environment.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you know we're not?
I remember hearing that the planet was running out of fossil fuels faster than it was producing them. I also remember hear the inverse of that later on. I was wondering if anyone could give me a definite answer. Are we consuming more than the world can produce? Is there a balance?
"When evil is ahead, and you don't have any arms - you've got to get a leg up!"
I can't wait for this to come out. The Tick is on of my all-time favorite animated series (right next to Attack of the Killer Tomatoes and Eek! The Cat).
Ahhh Yeah.
Recently, I was in a conversation with a person who comes from a very distinct background from mine. We were discussing your articles and how they (and consequently yourself) were hated passionately by slashdot readers. I do not believe that every Katz sentence is gospel, but in the general sense you are usual dead right. My friend and I had both come to the conclusion that it was probably because many slashdot readers didn't want to hear the truth. What is your perspective on their hatred of you. PS. I enjoyed how you not only made your point with the Please Die articles, but also used the slashdot forum to PROVE it.
I would like to thank you for pointing out why you did not agree with any of my proposals. Quite frankly, I would not like for any of them to go into place myself. In fact, I am not at all bothered by the amount of hostility on the internet. I do as another slashdot reader stated and ignore the comments I don't like.
I wanted to point out the fact that the only way to change the internet is to enforce that change. There are a lot of people on the internet, and if they wish for a non-hostile environment, then I am all for that. If they wish to leave things the same way they have always been then thats just fine with me as well. I'm not too picky.
I was simply offering people who wanted a non-hostile environment (i'll call them the gentle people) a few suggestions. The internet would be a terrible place without a few gentle souls, and I would hate to lose them.
Thank you also for pointing out my use of the word "we" when it should be "we americans." I forgot my audience.
It seems to me that quite often we tend to confuse the ideas of freedom and anarchy. The freedom that we were given when our country was founded, was given through a set of rules. A constitution and a bill of rights (rules) defined the boundries of social interaction. This set of rules formed what we call freedom. By restricting ourselves from hostile and unfair behavior, we became the home of liberty. If there had been no system of law set up, and america had become a land of anarchy, we would definitely see one of the most hostile environments anywhere. It would be probably like those old road warrior movies. So what am I getting at? What am I trying to say? That if we want an online community that creates a non-hostile environment we must be willing to endure some form of regulation. There must be some basic rules, maybe even an internet bill of rights, that must be set up. Freedom only lives when it is protected by a fair system of rules. Without rules, anarchy lives and freedom disappears. So you must choose freedom or anarchy. Regulation or a hostile environment.