Slashback: Antennae, Play, Book Larnin' 178
Out of warranty since day two -- More-than-ordinary Airport investigator Constantin von Wentzel, fearing that "readers will learn about the vagaries of Apple RAM instead of how to fix base stations," writes: "Cliff posted a article by Peter Deweese detailing how his Apple Airport failed. Unfortunately, these failures are next to certain since the power supply inside the Base Station will fry two components by two different means. One is heat, the other the switching power supply. Apple Base Station owners are well aware of the heat issue (the underside can get hot enough to bubble off the sticker)and the two capacitors inside the base station are rated for 1,000 hours @ 105 deg C - about 50 days. The other mode of failure is the power supply itself which switches at a high frequency and subjects the capacitors to high current loads. I investigated my ABS when it failed, and discovered two fried capacitors. It is true that the ABS will run as a DHCP router, etc. when the power supply has failed as long as the WaveLAN card has been removed. The question is how long. I put together a online guide to repair Apple Base Stations as well as how to retrofit external antennas. Both can be found at [this URL]."
Of course, I still like playing Earthball. In reference to the recent quest for non-zero sum games, stuq writes: " 35-40 years ago Buckminster Fuller created the 'World Game' -- the mother of all non-zero sum games. World Game is now under the excellent stewardship of Medard Gable and his World Game Institute.
The original game was played on a version of Fuller's Dymaxion map of the earth that covered an entire gym floor. They now have a satellite imagery version of the map!
There are 100 players, each representing 1% of humanity. Players are assigned
positions on the map in proportion to actual population density (which is
an eye opener -- half of India had to stand in the ocean). Everyone is apportioned:
energy, food, tech credits, etc. in a way that represents the actual distribution
of those rescoures. Additional players around the edge of the map represent
NGO's, Mother Nature, the world press, etc.
The goal is to make the world work for everyone. Utter chaos ensues
and the game play is totally exhilarating. The World Game Institute has taken
the large version of the game to players around the world including many
world leaders.
There is a
net version of the game. Looks like these people haven't been clued in to open source, but I'd bet
they would be interested."
Letters -- they're made out of letters! billn writes: "Long and short, member of a StarCraft clan was dealt a search warrant and is under investigation for 'tampering.' This is not a free speech suppression case. It's not a hate case. The followup is posted here. I did a lot of the research work myself, including a couple phone interviews. I'd just like to say, to all the people who flew off the handle without checking the facts first (including those of you who called Kent State to rant), LEARN TO READ.
For those who care, we'll be following the story to closure."
This after the recent story Cops Bust Starcraft Clan.
Have you got a license for this thing, sir? Olivier Lejade, CEO and co-founder of Nevrax wrote to say that he's posted a response to the recent mention of Nevrax's GPL-client/GPL-server game platform. More information is always good to have, thanks Olivier.
Re:Kent State's ResNet Server (Score:1)
Partially I think it is because NT, with its GUI, is percieved as being easier than a *nix OS, so people assume the work is done for them. With *nix, the admin has to understand what they are doing - the understanding leads to less mistakes being made. Because GUIs are considered easy, often NT admins have no knowledge of what they are actually doing, they are just a normal 'lowly' technician given control to save the company money.
Neat Fuller Projection xplanet patch & image (Score:1)
C.
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:1)
When you're lying on your deathbed looking back on your life, or it's flashing before your eyes after a truck hits you, or whatever, that's the endpoint. If you're thinking "that was pretty worthwhile on the whole", you've won. If you're thinking "at last this whole shitty existence is over" you've lost.
--
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Well, they had to make up /something/. (Score:1)
---
seumas.com
Re:Well, they had to make up /something/. (Score:1)
For all we know, people could be providing the complete and unobstructed truth to billn, but I doubt there is data existing outside of the university's hands to prove they're lying or covering up a mistake on their part.
Anyway, I would want the university to be much more open and straightforward (from the very beginning, not after they've had two weeks to manufacturer everything) before I just went ahead and said "oh, yeah! okay, it was just a misunderstanding -- the university is the good guy!".
---
seumas.com
Worldgame is where ? (Score:1)
I tried a few (dozen) of the links off of whois.org's search results page, but they don't seem to have a host for worldgame.org. I suppose hiding is one answer to a severe slashdotting, but I wanted to run this by one of the producers here (educational websites). Their loss.
Re:Help me out here (Score:1)
A better analogy is a beer can with someones name on it is found. That person's dorm fridge is confiscated. There is REAL evidence to support this action. Whether they committed the crime or not will be determined in the court.
And the webpage in a browser cache? That is really stretching it. Do you really think that the University is THAT dumb? Are they going to bring a lawsuit agains yahoo now because they found their webpage on the computer too?
Let me ask you this. If you found someones webpage on your server (in a directory not a browser cache) and the webserver is actually serving those pages, would you then agree that it is possible that a crime has been commited? Is it possible that this is the exact scenario that has occurred at Kent State?
This hardly sounds like a free speech issue.
Bucky is an inspiration (Score:1)
For more info about bucky visit The Buckminster Fuller Institute [bfi.org]
Re:Buck (Score:1)
Re:I'm Afraid of the Kent State UPD (Score:1)
The fact is, KSU police always have carried rifles in their cars. It's SOP. And those rifles are getting old. The military had a bunch of old M16's that they wanted to sell. They are selling them CHEAP. KSU thought "Here's a good deal, we get our guns, and we save people money."
It doesn't really matter what the police carry. Think about it. Will being shot by an M16 be any different than a rifle? No. It's going to hurt like Hell, and you may die. No matter what you get shot with. M16's are good guns; they are easy to clean, easy to train with, and can take a lot of abuse. And they were coming at a great price. But because of the school's history, and the fact that people are still upset about the shootings 31 years ago, the KSU police have decided not to use them.
I go to Kent. Our sidewalks are in horrible shape. We could use new dorms, since most are 40 years old and some have been shut down due to the large number of building code violations. We are tight for money, and now the police are going to have to spend a large amount of money instead of a little.
Think before you speak.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
zero sum. However under capitalism there are a
class of people who own the means of productions
and a class who don't, in order for the former
to make profits they must pay the latter less
than the value of their labour. So for the working
class life is negative sum, though they may
simultaneously benefit from improvements in
technology.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Family relationships are usually voluntary.
"desperate need to justify ones own beliefs" - You're not even trying to see the other side.
Our whole society _IS_ built on personal initiative, no matter what kind of structures we put in place. Cooercion is nowhere near as effective as voluntary (especially compensated) action. You could turn your whole last paragraph around on yourself. Don't think about how hard it would be to live without an inheritance, think about how easy it can be. Think about how free you would be if you weren't dependent on large impersonal orginizations (govt, church, Proctor and Gamble) to feed you your information, your job, and your safety.
Many would claim that the lack of opportunity in many areas can be attributed to 50% taxation, laws written to support monopolies, and people looking for the wrong kind of work. You can't fix that with more of the same.
Re:Buck (Score:1)
"Twister" was already copyrighted.
--
Re:Bucky is an inspiration (Score:1)
Even with his own wonderful dymaxion products (house, car, washroom, etc), they may have been technologically superior, but did why didn't they catch on then? Any explanation that includes the phrase "powers that be" demonstrates exactly where Bucky was wrong in his thinking.
Technological innovations are good, but to get them to be widely adopted you have to work the system, and once you are in a position to actually make some change, the system starts to look good to you so why change it? That's not to say that you shouldn't try to improve the world, but rather that you should realize that most people who are on top like the status quo - it's what got them to their power in the first place.
Hmm... this is almost what is happening in The Authority (comic book series) right now.
Re:I'm Afraid of the Kent State UPD (Score:1)
I thought that that was shot (bad pun) down and they weren't allowed to get them.
And I agree, there is no way that the campus police force needs modded m16s.
And slightly off topic, The room they raided was my old room.
Sigh...
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Why is it our poor do so much better than poor people did a hundred years ago? Why are the rich much richer today?
I don't think we stole that money from other developing countries, and I think pretty much across the board (other than countries ravaged by war), living conditions are better or at least equal today than they were 200 years ago.
Don't forget that our truly poor people here in America would be considered rich in many third world countries. Many welfare-class poor families have an automobile, a roof over their head and food on the table. It may not be the best available here, but it's better than you can get in some parts of the world. Those are our poor! Even the homeless can find a bed and a hot meal if they want it. Provided how? Charity.
Socialism is not the answer. I don't think Bill Gates owes any money back to the rest of the country -- though indirectly he gives a lot back. Most of his wealth is sitting in a bank or in the stock market where it can be used by other people, and at the same time, he's giving massive amounts to charity because he quite literally doesn't need it. However, just because he doesn't need it doesn't mean we have the right to go and foricibly take it.
In every country that has tried socialism, it has lead not to wealth and innovation, but back down the path to the lowest common denomonator.
Socialism is a wonderful ideal, and that is what makes it so appealing. It appeals to our hearts -- wouldn't it be nice if we could all get along and cooperate and help each other out. But, it doesn't work in a real world with real human beings. Because everyone is rewarded the same, it leads to cooruption and an appeal to the lowest common denominator. Why should I stay late and bust my hump if I'm going to be rewarded the same as my coworker that leaves early and surfs the net all day? Why bother? Why bother having a job at all if the state will take care of me?
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
I think it is well accepted that biological life is a nonzero game. The theory that social systems are nonzero is less well accepted. Not that I would argue against it. An interesting recent book on these topics was Nonzero: the logic of human destiny [amazon.com]
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
The amount of wealth in the world is not static, and expands whenever something new is created out of parts of an agregate lesser value.
"In simple terms: For each "rich" person there must exist a small army of "poor" people. "
Must exist? Do they just appear out of thin air? If enough idle rich exist, the demand for idle rich services increase, non-idle incomes increase. It's a dynamic system.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
I submit that the number of well paid contract programmers is about equal to the number of able people that can put up with the stress, uncertainty, and flavor of work involved, and the only manipulation going on is invented in your mind.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
It appears you are saying that the supply of idle time is a zero sum and a rich person's gain of idle time is extracted from many worker's idle time.
If so, this is the silliest thing I've ever heard of, and am at a loss as to how you could possibly be serious. The only conclusion I can come up with is that you are a very good troll.
Congratualations, you got me.
Possible doesn't matter (Score:1)
I find it far more likely that Kent just put those files there as a cover-up.
Cheers,
Rick Kirkland
second law (Score:1)
Creationists always try to use the second law,
to disprove evolution, but their theory has a flaw.
The second law is quite precise about where it applies,
only in a closed system must the entropy count rise.
The earth's not a closed system' it's powered by the sun,
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Anyway, in any economic system there will be people who accumulate wealth and power well beyond normal, regardless of whatever tax system is in place. I don't think this redistribution system is such a hot idea either, but at the same time I don't think it would kill the motivation of the powerful. I think it would inspire them to come up with new and creative ways to hide their wealth.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
the rest of us; he just got lucky. So now what?
The rest of us trade what little time we've got
left to Mr. Lucky in return for scraps off his
table; how does he decide what our lives are
worth? Looks around for someone who'll cut his
neighbor's throat cheaper, and there's no
shortage. Then, if Lucky can work it, he'll set
it up so the money runs the show from then on,
letting his children's children decide what the
market in starvation will bear during their gen-
eration. The human cast of this pathetic farce
comes and goes; the gold calls the shots and is
apparently immortal as well as amoral.
Re:When money is printed (Score:1)
same, although there are fewer of us to know about
it.
Re:Help me out here (Score:1)
Evan Reynolds evanthx@hotmail.com
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:1)
Firstly, you should not be out "looking" for a partner, like you look for a car. Mariage, or permanent relationships are not about "ownership" or "possession". It's not a competition to see who "has" the better partner. You are not "denying" that partner to anyone else. You are forming a partnership with another individual to establish a lifelong connection of mutual aid and intimacy.
I think you will find that not a lot of life is actually zero sum, unless you choose it to be. Also the people who DO see the world as zero sum are generally the ones who wish they had more or what the other person has and generally is not a happy person because of it. Always having to keep up with everyone else otherwise the're "losing" at life because other people are "better" than they are. Does this sound familiar to you?
The non zero sum phillosophy is good, because with it, no one loses unless they choose to lose.
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:1)
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:1)
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:1)
When you're lying on your deathbed looking back on your life, or it's flashing before your eyes after a truck hits you, or whatever, that's the endpoint. If you're thinking "that was pretty worthwhile on the whole", you've won. If you're thinking "at last this whole shitty existence is over" you've lost.
But the relationship is not over. This again shows the flaw in most peoples thinking about such things. You see the relationship as something of yours that involves another person. It's not. It has an existence (or a reality) of it's own that is not extinguished by the death of a participant. It might be your endpoint (although I don't believe that it is, but that's a whole other discussion, and I believe that there is another existence beyond the physical and that those that pass on still care about those that have not yet joined them, but I digress) but not the endpoint for your partner who still cares about you, even though you've gone. So the relationship is still there, and can still benefit the other person.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Time can be saved by hiring people or by machinery. I really don't understand the premise here. Would you rather people who are poor be unable to earn money for themselves? Is there a poverty gene that keeps them there or is menial work a stepping stone as well as a living base for those unable to further themselves.
Now you can argue that maybe the wages at each level aren't enough to move from one level to the next, but guess what? Taking risks and mainting pride and self-respect will get you a long way.
The "army" of poor people is not constant, people move on.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Companies get rich by paying per hour not per task (Score:1)
My computer makes my time much more valuable. I have access to tons of quality content that I can enrich my time with.
Having Debian means I have even more time because I don't have to hunt dependencies.
Time is a relative value, my knowledge, my determination to get things done, and my material wealth sets the value of those 24 hours.
Chaos theory teaches that equilibrium equals death. Things can't change. Basing wealth on time is dangerous. Instead of me deciding what my time is worth by my education and self-improvement, nowadays companies own my time regardless what I do, whether it's independent inventions of my own, tasks that cover multiple jobs. Hell, a plumber gets a better deal. Plumbers get paid for a specific service, while i get paid the same no matter what it is I do. Companies already recognize the wealth of time. That's how they get rich and rip off their employees who perform multiple complex tasks for which they should be getting paid according to the value of the task.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Actually, according to the second law of thermodynamics, everyone loses - eventually :-)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
Actually I think that example may in fact work very well. If everyone was smart(by our current standard), then the no one would consider that smart anymore. The bar would be raised.
-----
"People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them"
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
-----
"People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them"
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:1)
-----
"People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them"
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:1)
He wasn't debasing human intimacy, he's not advocating a return to slavery or the retraction of human rights or freedom of choice. It was an analogy [dictionary.com]. Get over it. Shit, people are so touchy these days...
-----
"People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them"
Re:Kent State issue (Score:2)
For example: In the halls at my U (UW-Eau Claire), a first underage drinking incident is handled internally -- the hall director would assign some set fine, but the cops would not be called. Any time someone was suspected of smoking pot, on the other hand, the cops would be called immediately. You know, 'cause one form of illegal drug use is less serious than the other, being that one is a socially accepted drug and all.
Anyhow, remember: Most people who run residence halls do so either because they have no career prospects or because they can't bear the thought of moving on from college life (or, often, a combination of these two). Expecting intelligent action is expecting too much.
----
Re:Well, they had to make up /something/. (Score:2)
There's some misinterpretation in the Kent Stater pieces, and I feel some of the facts cited by the sources I spoke with are also erroneous and overstated. 60 to 70 hours to fix some web content? Uploaded content 'alter configurations'? Getting details about what happened on the server was like pulling teeth. Being an engineering type, it was all I could do not to really get into it with Dave Futey, the ResNet admin of the server in question, knowing what I do about the systems and mechanics involved.
All in all, I think police involvement could have been avoided, and this has largely come down to the wrong people making decisions without understanding the information presented.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Damn, man, I've never felt that way about wealth. My boss is well-off, and that money is paying the salary of everyone I work with. That money is paying for my house, my car, and everything I buy. That money is paying the wages of the folks at the corner market, the farmers who grow the food, the barber who cuts my hair. Nobody is cutting anybody's throat for anything. Your rhetoric is unneccesarily harsh, and hides your point.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
You are trolling, but I'm hooked. The 'zero-sum-ness' of a game is not determined by consensus, sharing, or community. The positive-sum-ness of capitalist thinking might be related by the idea that if I have two blenders, and you have two icemakers, we can trade one blender for one icemaker, and now we can both make pina colada. Nobody lost. "Money" and "Markets" are simply tools that facilitate this exchange. The most efficient markets are those that are kept carefully isolated from manipulation by anyone. The conservative lassaiz-faire concept is the idea that government manipulation of markets is what prevents everyone from trading with near-perfect efficiency, keeping some people from making pina colada. I would go a bit further, and say that corporate and private interference in markets is just as bad for you and I. That is why insider trading needs to be restricted, among other things.
Wealth is not energy, and is easily created and destroyed. If I take fruit, flour, and other ingredients, and make a pie, I can sell that pie for more than the cost of my ingredients. The difference between what I paid for the ingredients and what I get for the finished pie is, roughly, the value of the time I spent making it. If you and I both make pies and sell them, but your pie is better and you sell it for more, where did that value come from? What if we make our pies, and nobody is hungry, so we can't sell them? Where did that value go?
You should learn sufficient economics to understand that there are trades that are advantageous to both sides. Nobody is ripping anybody off in these - it's just that value is relative.
And people who say things like this are trolls..
That Dumb (Score:2)
True sidenote: I had a manager frantic because he did just this, found someones Temporary Internet Files with pr0n in them. Was a bit abashed when I pointed out the truth to him.
--
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
Yeah, that's what it is. Everyone wants to eliminate competition in the world. Your sociological acumen has once again seen through the great liberal conspiracy and found the truth.
F'in trolls...
--
I can read... and deeper (Score:2)
Sounds a bit naive, no? Do you expect that if someone in this country is trying to suppress speech with the aid of police force, that they charge you with "undesirable expression of speech"?
But regardless of whether this case involves the First Amendment or not, this and many, many other stories leave the same questions open. Did the incident require the involvement of police? Did it require confiscation of equipment -- even equipment that has nothing to do with the network -- and the "related articles" (in billn's story), whatever those were?
Apparently not, because the actions they were initially going to take involved just a meeting with their RD and someone from ResNet or the academic IT. Something tells me that in the process of planning this meeting, someone in IT or ResLife called Campus Security to ask a quick question, and Campus Security decided to bust it open and take over. (Note that they haven't even let IT look at the box, and I really doubt that campus security has better computer experts than IT.) Apparently busting "hackers" makes college rentacops (remember, these departments are usually staffed with people who couldnt even get jobs as transit cops) look good.
I had my own share of geek-profiling in college, so I can't say that the bias isn't there. I hear even at MIT they are cracking down on undesired expression [bonsaikitten.com] and other innocent tomfoolery by their brightest.
And I also know that what holds for the people who work for college police also holds for those who work for college IT: they tend to suck at it. I wouldn't be surprised if they left a no-password login as the default on their main server; hell, at my college, plenty of administrators' desktops were wide open on the campus network -- as in 'I can mount that drive, and if i hit delete, it will work.' (Hmm -- so thats how much the new building is going to cost!) And in my last job, we routinely got reports of 'hacking attempts' because someone running a jumpy network filter would catch someone pinging them.
As for BfD, one wonders why the hell they would want to post their own clan site on a server theyre not supposed to have access to. I dont suppose that the campus cops have thought about that -- at this point, with this press, they need to bring this guy 'down' to look good, regardless of how much it fscks this kid over.
I can't get the Stater's story (site is down?) so I can't argue the merits of the offical version (undoubtedly written by a green journalism student with an AOL-based knowledge of computers, if that). But billn, for his assurance that he knows the true motives behind this blip in the campus police log, doesn't have much to say about any of this in his rebuttal. It reads objectively enough, but to assume that what the campus cops say (or even what academic IT says) is necessarily the truth is an icy footing.
-- Keith "I used to be a journalism student too, but then i wised up" Tyler
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Second: who became poor? If this lump of gold was found in North America, probably some American Indian nation. Always remember that the state creates mineral rights, and other similar property rights, by force.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/
Re:Kent State issue (Score:2)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
In fact, you are not asserting a right to life in your argument, but a right not to be killed. For example, if you were subject to an act of nature (let's say getting struck by lightning) and thus were hurt to the point that your recovery needed the aid of others, would they have to help you? In your society, they would not.
Correct. If they do not help me then they're probably not very nice people, but I don't believe they should be thrown in prison.
Who, if we take your society to the extreme, would leave you there to die, since, of course, they would receive no compensation for the act of helping you.
I doubt that. Have you ever donated any money or time to charity? If so, why? You certainly aren't compelled to, you do it because you think it's right and it probably makes you feel good. I'm absolutely not saying that it's wrong to help others, only that the choice should be yours and not forced by someone pointing a gun at you.
If we use your definition of right to life, there would be no hospital care except for the wealthy, no care for the elderly
Again, I don't believe this follows. Many charities provide food, shelter, and medical care, and function completely on voluntary donations. In fact, they tend to be more effective than the much more expensive government programs.
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
All your events [openschedule.org] are belong to us.
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
Re:Flawed reasoning (Score:2)
Regardless of whether it's right or wrong, our society bases partnering on physical attractiveness, and as such people who use that as a metric of who they partner (although not the only metric) with are likely making the right choice. In general, whatever the society deems "attractive," be it thinness or largeness, or money, or stature, the partnering process will typically result in long term good matches and short term bad matches. Thus, it is a postive sum game.
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
Think of 100 people. The first finds a parter slightly better suited to them than the average. The next then does the same, etc, etc. It is cetainly possible (and in reality likely) that the total happiness is higher than if no one evey matched up.
This is the same principle that shows that trade is positive sum. You have M&Ms, I have gummi bears. We trade half for half, and because of the law of diminishing returns, we come out of the trade with more enjoyment. Partnering is supposed to com out of the trade with more enjoyment. When you consider the whole system, it's still positive sum, because some people are incompatible while others are a good fit (this would be more like me having M&Ms and you having gummis and neither of us like what we have but like the others. We trade our candy, or partners, and we are more happy for it).
World Game (Score:2)
World game (Score:2)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Nonesense. This is almost exactly backwards. The theory of redistribution of wealth is that given that money has diminishing marginal utility, you can increase total utility by taking something away from the richest people and giving it to the poorest. Imagine, for instance, that person A has $1 billion and four others are flat broke. If you take $4 million from A and give $1 million each to the other four, A will hardly even notice that it's gone, but the people who receive the money will be much, much better off. That's positive sum.
Re:When money is printed (Score:2)
Economically speaking, technological progress is not a good example -- its the only example we don't live in a zero sum world. Your gold example wasn't just a bad example, it was actually an incorrect example, for exactly the reason outlined above.
I have absolutely no idea what you think you're trying to explain through the nucear holocaust thing, though...
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Nice abstraction, but in the real world it doesn't work that way. When say that everyone has the right to life, it doesn't mean anything unless somebody enforces that right. That means that your are commanding others to do your bidding: to write and enforce the laws that protect that right. In most societies around the world, that means involuntary taxation, subjection to law, etc. These are all affirmative acts. Your assertion that protecting a right to life is different from protecting a right to food is false.
--
When that day comes (Score:2)
The only currency will be attention.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Read my comment again. I said the real currency is time, thats also why I put the words rich and poor in quotes.
Material wealth has no effect on the supply of time. There are still only 24 hours in a day.
When money is printed (Score:2)
Or in this case the value of everyone else's gold.
If you want to know who got "poorer" in your example, well it was everyone else who had money in gold/gold interests.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Money is relative, what the real commodity being traded is time. What percent of your time is spent serving others, and what percent is spent having fun? For one person to have extreme material wealth means that lots&lots of people have to spend their time working for that person. (building his houses, cooking his food, penning his FUD, tracking his taxes, piloting his personal jet, etc), whereas he spends his time having fun- or working for himself.
In simple terms: For each "rich" person there must exist a small army of "poor" people.
Actually (Score:2)
Place the ideal state, where everyone has their ideal partner at infinity (nirvana). Zero is the state where noone has any partner.
If you choose a partner based upon criteria where the selection you make will cause a certain number of others to be unable to find their ideal mate, you are reducing the sum. (For example if you choose someone who is ideal to you, but you are not ideal to them)
If you choose the ideal partner for yourself and you are your partner's ideal partner, then you are increasing the sum.
Also, if you make yourself a better person, you become more desirable, and could be an ideal mate for more people. This would make the sum go up. Conversely being slovenly would decrease the sum.
(Since completely solving for every person on earth would be a travelling salesman class problem, its fair to call the nirvana state an infinity even with a mere 6 billion people.)
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
I'm currently a high school student, my current school isn't too bad but my old school went way too far. At one point they considered abolishing the honor roll because the 20-30% of students who didn't make it felt left out. They also decided to do away with tryouts for teams, and instead used a lottery system if more people tried out than they could take. I believe we went from 2nd in our league to last after they implemented this... oh well.
If anyone knows what article I'm talking about that'd be nice, I couldn't find it for the life of me.
Zero sum Corporations? (Score:2)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Yep, but it wasn't that it was necessary they only work 15-20 hours a week, it was necessary they work at most 15-20 hours a week. Due to the ins-and-outs of hunting/gathering, any more than that and you're expending more energy than you're taking in. Most of that "leisure time" was spent actively doing as little as possible..no energy to spare.
Re: (Score:2)
Worldmeters (Score:2)
Number of Windows Operating System crashes since January 1st:
27,010,000 and counting
This is something that we should have available for download or link up or something.
what a hoot!
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Do you understand that GDP growth is a measurement of a self-affirming group? GDP Growth does not relate in a linear manner with 'quality of life'.
"same amount of wealth in existence today as there was 100 years ago"
You are not claiming that the improvement in the standard of living for the last 100 years is a simple product of 'Capitalism'? Capitalism is a mere market construct - it is artificial. It has been chosen. There are other systems. Some have more reasonable long-term prospects for success (read: Communism). I would suggest it is Science, Culture and Knowledge. Humanity has the good fortune of experiencing a massive growth in the three afore mentioned facets of culture - the same would have happened if 'we' were not ruthless corporate whores... there is no proof of the two being absolutely related. I would guess that Americans perceive there present 'power' as a testament to the 'rightchiousness' of Capitalism, that it is the 'best system - just look at how terrific we are'.
I would counter that America has the good fortune of being living on a previously un-exploited landmass and never having to fight a modern domestic war. Dont be so sure of the ultimate 'success' of Corporatist Capitalism. America may be the 'wealthiest' nation - but it also enjoys *ALOT* of major social problems: Puritanism, Intolerance, Religious Zealotry, Legislated Morals, Crime, Cultural Myopia, Racism, Corruption, Consumerism and Apathy. These things are a result of individuals being convinced of their self-importance, and their greed being encouraged. This aids in maintaining the all justifying 'profit motive'. Dont confuse random good fortune with destiny - and dont let propaganda and public hysteria confuse your judgement. Look outside your borders and realize that the reason the rest of the world hates Americans is there hubris and lack of perspective... just what your post displays.
Oh and btw: GPD Growth != Success. [adbusters.org]
Note: If you happen to not be American, your opinions exemplify one.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Yes - thanks for the clarity.
these must be provided by the labor of others
these must be provided by the labor of others & Socialists believe in forcibly taking the fruits of other people's labor
both of these are basically untrue - socialists arent 'lazy'. Looking for a 'free ride'. Dont be so paranoid. The basic idea is that Class Structures are inherently flawed: It is not necessary for people to work 'against' on another. *WE* would all be better off to co-operate. Organizing our economy around the idea that people are all entitled to basic needs, and working together to assure them is a worthier collective goal. We do have a choice, we can purposely organize a system to exploit and exclude people or we can try and provide more - for all.
This is what I am advocating. Uncontrolled, rabid capitalism will not lead to a 'better world'. It may be a method to aid a few (bourgeoisie) to live much better than virtually everyone else (proletariat) - but it is not the kind of 'worthy goal' we should be aligning ourselves with.
The world is not a cold, dark, uncaring place unless we succumb to cynicism.
BTW: RIAA==MPAA==BigThreeAuto==WIPO==WTO==Bourgeoisie
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Quite possibly, but the essential part is that the 'capital' they gain is *private*. Capitalism is the antithesis of sharing. Therefore, all capitalists are depriving others of their wealth, ie the poor get poorer and the rich get richer.
You'll also find that hard-working capitalist corporations prefer to obtain unskilled and semi-skilled labour at as low a cost as possible. This is good, because a reduction in costs can increase profits, market share, etc. However, it does go directly against democratic governments, who have the unfortunate task of providing at least a minimum socialist agenda, ie employment laws and minimum wages, because its capital is 'votes', and happy people make good voters.
The 'free market' has winners and losers, but I don't think that people would choose to be born if they were forced to live their existance purely based on a ruthlessly capitalistic 'free market'. It's a non-natural invention, supported by the individuals who benefit from it the most. Evolution doesn't benefit individuals, only the collective.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
However, that is absolutely not the case . As Jared Diamond mentions in "The Third Chimpanzee", studies have shown that among studied animals and humans, the object of desire is someone who resembles a person you were raised by/with but not someone you were actually raised by/with. In humans, that set of characteristics include belief systems (religious, political, etc.)
The result is that my ideal is highly unlikely to be ideal or even highly valued by someone raised by a tall, thin, dark-haired, religious Eastern Orthodox Russian-American Democrat with perfect vision.
The problem with zero-sum games is that they do not accurately reflect how market economies or personal relationships work. But this is not a cry to eliminate competition; obviously competition is an element of the non-zero-sum "games" of market economies and personal relationships. But a game where player 1 comes out 100% ahead of where he started and player 2 comes out only 50% ahead has both competition and isn't zero-sum.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:2)
Flawed reasoning (Score:2)
Think of 100 people. The first finds a parter slightly better suited to them than the average. The next then does the same, etc, etc. It is cetainly possible (and in reality likely) that the total happiness is higher than if no one evey matched up.
In an ideal world maybe. But one thing I read recently was a statistical study of the effects of societal ideals for attractiveness on whether or not people end up with partners they are suited for. And what was found was that when a society has a high ideal for attractiveness (as we do given the media's fascination with "beautiful" people) more people ended up with people that were less than averagely suited to each other.
So in that sense, the sum is negative, because most people don't end up with someone better suited to them than the average.
Shades of grey (Score:2)
If you choose a partner based upon criteria where the selection you make will cause a certain number of others to be unable to find their ideal mate, you are reducing the sum. (For example if you choose someone who is ideal to you, but you are not ideal to them)
But you aren't just either not suited or ideal, there's a spectrum of appeal between the two... So by taking your "ideal" partner, you could be denying another thousand people the chance for a "75% ideal" partner... And if there is also a "90% ideal partner" for you but only a "5% ideal" partner for them, then only by taking the 90% ideal partner and giving your ideal partner to them do we benefit as a whole...
You need to relax :) (Score:2)
Maybe you've been at the feminism or something for too long... :)
Last time I checked, sex ratios were fairly balanced. That means that there really can be someone for everyone.
Yes, but how well matched will these people be for each other? Even if there was an "ideal" person for everybody, and even if they matched, how many of these would find each other and then get together? Not that many I'd assume, not with 250 million people in the US alone.
As far as "denying your partner to everyone else," did it ever occur to you that your partner is a person and not a commodity? They choose to stay with you - you don't own them.
See, you're misinterpreted what I said again. For some reason you seem to think that I am physically restraining my partner from being with other people as well. One would hope that if they are with you they do not want to be with anyone else. If they did, then they shouldn't be with you, and probably won't be after a while either.
As for experiance with relationships? Well, not that it's any of your business, but I'm perfectly happy with my wife of six years thank you. But nice try missy.
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
Not positive sum eh? No wonder you're failing at it.
Well no, it's not. If you find yourself a partner then you have denied that partner to everyone else (assuming fidelity of course). You win, they lose, hence it is a zero-sum situation. Of course if you're polyamorous it's different and you can have a postive-sum situation since by having someone you aren't denying them to anyone else...
Oh and thanks for the ad hominem attack. Very big of you.
Re:What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:2)
Yeah, that's what it is. Everyone wants to eliminate competition in the world.
Strawman. I never claimed everyone wanted to, just that some do. Take a look at the decline in competitive sports in schools in the UK for instance. And there are groups who agree with this position here in the US. Of course as long as football brings in as much money for colleges as it does here, competitive sports are hear to stay along with things like sports scholarships and other such BS.
F'in trolls...
Oooh, I'm hurt. An opinion you don't like! Quick, must be a troll!
Now if only... (Score:2)
Re:Help me out here (Score:3)
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:3)
s/socialism/capitalism/ for this post to make any sense.
Are all men born with the same inherent rights to food, shelter, clothing and as comfortable an existence as possible? Yes.
No. This is the fundamental difference between capitalists and socialists. I don't believe that anything requiring an affirmative act by another person can be a right. When I assert that I have the right to life, that means you shouldn't be able to kill me but leaves you otherwise free to conduct yourself. When you assert that you have the right to food, shelter, and clothing, these must be provided by the labor of others, so you am asserting that you should be able to command others to do your bidding. What were you saying about not being more important than anyone else?
Your 'real world' dogma is a defense to justify your own greed
Capitalists believe in accumulating wealth through the voluntary exchange of goods and services(*). Socialists believe in forcibly taking the fruits of other people's labor because they believe they need it more. I'm having a hard time figuring out how "greed" applies to the first and not the second.
(*)Note that this does not include entities such as the RIAA, who prefer to accumulate wealth by bribing lawmakers to pass anti-consumer laws.
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:3)
And you're correct, but only if you stop the analysis there. In reality, A will quickly notice that anytime he has earned more than his "fair share" of wealth, it is confiscated and given to those who have less. Why then should he continue to produce wealth? Why wouldn't he just sit back and get his share of the money confiscated from E (until E figures the game out and stops working too)? I suppose your answer could be "if he thinks like that then he's an evil selfish bastard", and while that may or may not be true, it doesn't solve the problem.
Of course both the original example and my reply are overly simplified, but the point is that analysis of wealth redistribution has to take into account the longer term effects of the redistribution policies themselves.
Re:Earthball??? (Score:3)
Kent State's ResNet Server (Score:3)
99% of the web site hacks on WinNT are becuase some administrator (or desktop-support-person-forced-to-run-the-server) gave anonymous users write access to the website through Frontpage extensions. It's the equivalent of giving 'nobody' write/put permissions on your Apache site. Univeristy departments are probably the worst at this too, so it's no suprise that someone who's "idea of shutting down his computer is kicking it until the light goes off" could upload some webpages.
Nevrax comments in the original story (Score:3)
Strangely enough, none of his comments were moderated above a score of 1.
No such thing as a non-zero-sum game (Score:3)
Every game Ive played that didnt take drastic measures to prevent players from competing with one another always had players competing with one another. Any game that did an effective job of preventing this competition was quickly abandoned as boring.
Games that completely prevent competition between players arent games anymore... theyre called *drum roll* chat rooms! Or mucks or whatever.
Anyway, competition is fun, right? What better reason to get up in the morning?
Helpful AirPort Hint (Score:3)
However, I don't see the bubbling in the label that was in that link.
I did intend to mount the antenna on the wall at one point, but never did it. The wall bracket is still on, though, and it serves to elevate the base station off of the shelf that it's on, which is probably good for ventilation.
Moral of the story: Put that bracket on, even if you're not intending to mount it. Not only could it make your unit run cooler, but it gives it that kind of floating-UFO action.
Non-Zero sum game (Score:3)
I'm Afraid of the Kent State UPD (Score:4)
Yea, I know that whole 1970s thing was the National Guard getting just a tisch trigger happy. But the Kent State UPD just bought freaking M16s [tompaine.com]
Supposedly, they're being modified to semi-automatic. Still, what the hell does a UPD need M16s for? If it's that bad, call in the city police or sherrifs for help. Or even the National Guard if you have a riot on your hands.... oh wait... that happened already. My bad.
----
Re:Non-Zero sum game (Score:4)
That's not "left-wing theory". It's called the laws of thermodynamics.
--
What's wrong with zero sum games? (Score:4)
Is there something wrong with the idea of competition and having someone win and others lose? After all many of the challenges people face in their lives will be zero-sum ones - either you win or you lose, and not everyone can come out ahead. Finding a partner is not a positive-sum game for instance, and that's about the most important thing there is.
There does seem to be certain people that seem to think that competition is bad, and that it is somehow "unfair" to those that aren't as good. Peronally, I think it's unfair to cosset these people and make them believe that things are going to be easy when they hit the outside world.
At least losing in school will prepare them for losing outside of it. Harsh, yes, but better sooner rather than later.
Still, the game sounds interesting and I may have to have a go. Hopefully managing the world's resources won't turn out to be a zero sum game, even though America seems to think it is, and if they don't actively try and scupper all attempts to curb our excesses we will somehow "lose".
Help me out here (Score:5)
Oohkay. So, there's no real evidence that a crime has been committed (maybe someone logged onto the server, fired up IE, and the pages ended up in the cache), but the judge is quick to hand out a search warrant and the police have the right to hold the kid's computer for up to a year.
So, if I were to find a beer can in a dorm trash can, would the judge grant a search warrant to confiscate the dorm fridge of every resident (despite the fact that some residents might be overage, or that a visitor might have desposited it, or whatever)? After all, a crime might have been committed.
In my opinion [slashdot.org], this case was never important for any free speech implications: It's the unreasonable search and seizure you should be concerned with. Even in a case where it the police don't know a crime has even been committed, they can easily obtain a warrant to suspect a suspect's civil liberties.
If the government tries to regulate guns, special interests swing into action. If the government tries to stop someone from saying anything, Slashdot goes nuts. Why isn't this just as bad, if not worse?
----
Out of warranty since day two (Score:5)
Had the airport been intact Apple would have presumably replaced it (it's not cost-effective to repair them) free of charge under the one year warranty.
Unfortunately due to (reportedly) poor electrical design the device's lifetime appears to be only slightly greater then one year. How convenient for Apple. I'd always suspected this of my kitchen appliances but generally Apple's equipment (except for their old 9" monitors & Mac SE power supplies) has been notably high quality.
Electrical/design defects aside the Apple Airports really are a fabulous bit of engineering. For a few hundred bucks they act as a really nifty DHCP/NAT server. One doesn't even need a Mac to configure these suckers as their OS manufacturer has a Java one out. Surreally enough the AirPorts are x86-based, which is strange considering the strength of PPC in embedded devices.
In somewhat related new the Orinoco/WaveLAN 802.11 cards have now dropped in price to ~US$150 for Silver, ~US$170 for Gold (128 bit encryption.) Furthermore reports are out that the next generation of these devices will shrink down to two or so discrete chips meaning even smaller/more efficient devices.
Now if only more manufacturers would start embedding antennas in their devices.
Kent State issue (Score:5)
"Titanic was 3hr and 17min long. They could have lost 3hr and 17min from that."