Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft, Feds Revise Settlement Agreement
An Anonymous Coward writes: "This AP article writes of some changes negotiated by MS and the Justice Department to the anti-trust settlement. MS urges Judge Kollar-Kotelly to accept the settlement it negotiated with the Justice Department b/c doing otherwise would raise constitutional issues. Please."
It seems to me that the reasons for doing such a thing are glaringly self-evident. As far as pro-Microsoft vs. pro-Linux, this article is addressing a central issue of interest to both camps. And gee, I thought Slashdot was a forum for discussion and opinion... I presume those who aren't interested in such topics wouldn't read the article or comments.
Yup, it seems as if you are trolling, as you have added nothing to the discussion.
Did someone else advocate the US government boycott Microsoft software? If so, the mark should have been "redundant". If not, then I did add something to the discussion, no?
Although, perhaps you are on the boader of flamebait and trolling.
I'd have voted flamebait, or just linux moron...
Perhaps Slashdot needs an "Opinionated" mod, which could either be a +1 or -1 depending on which way the moderator felt it should go... ;-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
Actually, if you can find the right lever you can do a lot.
Denver was operating its photo radar in a way purely designed to rip off drivers. Sure the traffic speed on I-70 is above the posted limit, but you don't "fix" that by putting photo radar units on the on-ramps where the interstates merge! Ditto some local streets where the speed limit may be 30, but the heavy traffic always goes 40-45.
So lawyers found an irregularity in the ways their tickets were handled, so they contested their tickets and won. IIRC the problem they found was that Denver contracted out too much of the process to a third party, something explicitly prohibited by the enabling legislation because of fears that it would become a cash cow instead of a legitimate safety tool.
After the first TV news reports, there was talk of a class-action suit. Denver just announced it will use PR in the way intended by the enabling legislation (e.g., in school zones), and has tossed out all unpaid tickets.
There's even some talk that the city may be required to refund all previously paid PR tickets. In this case, I would not mind seeing those lawyers collect my refunds if it puts a permanent end to the hypocritical PR program. As I said, I don't mind PR near schools or other areas where kids are likely to run into the street without warning, but keep them off the interstate and major roads.
So you can fight these nuisance tickets and win big, but you have to have the right tools.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Okay, so they arn't all execs, but you get the idea. The house is packed! What a fun looking club to be in! I mean, its still a pretty damn tight family ......
"Old man yells at systemd"
The word 'lesion' has only one s.
Then they have no reasons which are not opinions. Not that opinions are bad, just not very convincing.
I generally say something is "glaringly self-evident" when a feel that a reasonably intelligent, reasonably well-informed person would feel likewise. I've given further rationale in other posts, read those if you're still confused.
Also, the boycott Microsoft software is a comment in every single story on slashdot.
Yes, but those are different in that they encourage a general, voluntary boycott (which is a fine idea also, I might add). I'm advocating a court-ordered, government only cessation of Microsoft software purchases.
[irrelevant examples snipped]
I personally don't think that the government should boycott Microsoft due to a conflict of interest, as basically everything can be described as a conflict of interest with the government.
Not true at all. Most companies the government does business with are ethical, and not monopolies. Microsoft deserves special treatment (and I don't mean that in a good way).
Unfortunately, the government has a lot of responsibility for the current state of Microsoft, but that is another matter.
There are many other _good_ reasons to boycott Microsoft, but I see no good reasons for it being due to a conflict of interest.
The conflict of interest lies between the arm of the goverment that should be punishing it for antitrust violations, and those which are rewarding it by purchasing it's products. Simple enough for you?
This conversation will now be modded (Score:-1, Offtopic)
Another clueless moderator...but there are so many of those, aren't there? =)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
Just you're average nitpicker.
... not ... flame ... grammar ...
Must
Nope, no sig