That's still not a fair assesment. The fact of the matter is that computers are incredibly elaborate and complicated devices that require a fair deal of knowledge and care to operate. Just because people don't want to learn about them and maintain them doesn't mean it isn't a necessity. If someone said that they wanted a car just to go from point a to point b without having to learn about obscure things like traffic laws or basic vehicle maintenance, you'd call them a fool. The same applies with computing: Just because you don't want to maintain it and learn about it doesn't mean you don't have to.
You know, sysadminning, if you make the most of it, you read bugtraq, you do your apt-get updates and you make an effort to patch, you can do well. If you don't, your server is just stuck in a rack.
Speaking of abusing a phrase...
Besides, Chomosky has written many books about "voluntary censorship". Would you call what the *AA does censorship? They aren't government, but they sure as hell are bad for the free flow of thought and information.
Just because it is their right doesn't mean it IS right. Stephen Hawking is well within his rights to quit science and take up bowling, but that would be a stupid decision and have negative ramifications for the general population. As does voluntary censorship.
Pretty soon the only people (other than we good-natured yet paranoid slashdotters) who have privacy will be the scary four horsemen of the infopocalypse: Terrorists, drug dealers, pedophiles, and organized criminals. Hooray!
Ah, there is the rub. There is no need for a special case. The whole purpose of dividing money into groups to allow different types of taxation is to create the illusion of less taxes. It's the same reason that stores price things in weird increments (what seems cheaper at first glance: $900.00 or $899.95). The same applies to taxes. By dividing taxes into all of these bizzare categories, you get to turn taxes into micropayments. 10,000 different $.10 taxes seems less than $800 at first glance, but...
Good god, I get tired of this circular reasoning. Consumers like M$ because it has lots of 3rd party apps. It has lots of 3rd party apps because it is popular. Can't you people deal with having to learn an alternate (gimp, maya, etc.) or setting up an emulation environment for a while? If everyone just dealt with a few months of using linux and some kludge to get there windows apps running, then vendors would clue in. Look at what id software is doing. Complaints like this would have been comparable to early Americans complaining that there wasn't enough political familiarity with democracy, and so we should go back to a monarchy "because it has more blanket support amongst noblemen and industrialists".
Slashdot Mirror
to botnet creators.
That's still not a fair assesment. The fact of the matter is that computers are incredibly elaborate and complicated devices that require a fair deal of knowledge and care to operate. Just because people don't want to learn about them and maintain them doesn't mean it isn't a necessity. If someone said that they wanted a car just to go from point a to point b without having to learn about obscure things like traffic laws or basic vehicle maintenance, you'd call them a fool. The same applies with computing: Just because you don't want to maintain it and learn about it doesn't mean you don't have to.
You know, sysadminning, if you make the most of it, you read bugtraq, you do your apt-get updates and you make an effort to patch, you can do well. If you don't, your server is just stuck in a rack.
Microsoft has the unique/horrifying/useful ability to re-intake their own shit, after it has been shat onto the world.
Microsoft: Stop getting our product for free! China: Or else what? Microsoft: Or we'll stop trying to sell it to you! China: Umm...
When did Mexico and India get put on a trade embargo?
You just wait for AOL to leak their search history.
It seems to me what they are doing is just a fancy magic trick, just like in this picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:UNSIBA-5_Unsich tbarkeit_mit_Spiegeln.jpgFrom the Wikipedia
I agree. That comment is like saying whales are selfish, killing thousands of krill just to sustain themselves. Life feeds on life.
Just because it is their right doesn't mean it IS right. Stephen Hawking is well within his rights to quit science and take up bowling, but that would be a stupid decision and have negative ramifications for the general population. As does voluntary censorship.
Why you insolent... Give me your home address, or I'll KILL YOU!!!
Pretty soon the only people (other than we good-natured yet paranoid slashdotters) who have privacy will be the scary four horsemen of the infopocalypse: Terrorists, drug dealers, pedophiles, and organized criminals. Hooray!
Yeah, along with there 136V electricity and 11/120 Ethernet. Not to mention those three-wheeled cars.
Where is the liability for McDonalds? If they distributed burgers containing viruses their asses would be sued up and down the fry machine.
Ah, there is the rub. There is no need for a special case. The whole purpose of dividing money into groups to allow different types of taxation is to create the illusion of less taxes. It's the same reason that stores price things in weird increments (what seems cheaper at first glance: $900.00 or $899.95). The same applies to taxes. By dividing taxes into all of these bizzare categories, you get to turn taxes into micropayments. 10,000 different $.10 taxes seems less than $800 at first glance, but...
Who needs ext4? I'm perfectly satisfied with my 640k, and so should you!
Good god, I get tired of this circular reasoning. Consumers like M$ because it has lots of 3rd party apps. It has lots of 3rd party apps because it is popular. Can't you people deal with having to learn an alternate (gimp, maya, etc.) or setting up an emulation environment for a while? If everyone just dealt with a few months of using linux and some kludge to get there windows apps running, then vendors would clue in. Look at what id software is doing. Complaints like this would have been comparable to early Americans complaining that there wasn't enough political familiarity with democracy, and so we should go back to a monarchy "because it has more blanket support amongst noblemen and industrialists".