You only have to bike a 25 minutes walk and you complain? Are there no back roads where you live? Hell, I'd take a mountain bike and go cross country and would still make it in no time.
Can't do that here...I'd be a sweat soaked smelly worker 10 min before I got to work. Hell, it is already muggy and in the high 70's here early in the mornings. I have to look reasonably professional.
Wearing the right clothes helps. Also, if you have a special meating and really have to look professional, come 10 minutes early to cool down before. You can use the time to go over your agenda or just relax.
Not to mention carrying my lunch, my backpack...sometimes the company laptop, and books at times.
There are bicycle bags for that. The good ones cost about 80 Euros and last a lifetime.
I'm not suggesting this at all. I question that for example a piece of land that is far removed from a person's home can be their property. It's not that the government should step in and say that you already have enough land and you can't have anymore, but rather that some kind of land (most of it actually) cannot be owned by you in the first place.
This is fair, because it applies to everybody else, too, except to the people that are local to a place.
As far as intellectual property is concerned, even the US constitution explicitly grants the copyright, that further is supposed to be limited! These are not natural rights, the goal is to advance the common good. Personally, I think that the underlying assumption that copyright is helpful in that sense is questionable in todays world where culture advances so rapidly. At least the time limits should be decreased radically to less than a decade.
Look, I'm an amateur photographer slowly trying to turn my hobby into a business. I have no problem giving my shots away for free for non-commercial use once I've been paid for the production of them. I mean, once it's out there, it's out there. I derive so much inspiration from other pictures that I can freely access, so who am I to control how other people access culture?
That's the difference to enjoying the fruits of my labour vs. enjoying the fruits of my mind (ideas). How can I monopolize the latter when I've already given them away by publishing them? I can't have my cake and eat it too.
I haven't used Excel in ages but since it's part of MS Office it's roughly comparable to Calc. Honestly, I could care less about all the bloat that an office suite implies. I'm talking about things like collaboration, versioning, recovery, and so on.
I only use Calc but have to have the complete suite installed. I'm using standalone applications for all my writing and presentation needs. I also have hourly backups.
So what I'm looking for is a standalone FOSS spreadsheet application. Other users have suggested gnumeric, but there's no OS X port and I rather use Calc than run gnumeric in X.
BTW, when I last used Excel the experience was way better than Calc on OS X is now.
To sustain his life, a man must be free to use the product of his mind and effort as he sees fit. If he is not free to do so, then he cannot sustain his life as a human being - he would be a slave.
IHMO, the operative word in your argument is sustain. I do agree that some measure of private property is necessary, such as a roof over your head (although often it's rented) and the stuff in your home and on you. Basically, what's called personal possessions. But your argument breaks down the further you get away from that. How is owning multiple houses, cars, song rights, whatever necessary for a sustained life?
As to owning the fruits of your mind, that's only been true for the last 300 years or so. People should own the fruits of their labour, something which is not guaranteed today.
I should have mentioned that I'm on OS X and don't run X applications if I can avoid it. I do remember Gnumeric from earlier times though, and I agree that it's quite good.
(Now, if someone could port GnuCash to Cocoa, that'd be great!)
1. Do what FudRucker advises 2. Watch your hose burn down 3. Face charges for arson and possibly battery/manslaughter 4. Go to jail, do not collect $400 5. Profit?
Well, for an office suite it probably is. But I find the concept of an office suite fundamentally broken, just like the concept of a personal information manager. I want individual applications and sadly there is no good FOSS spreadsheet that I'm aware of. So I have to put up with the bloatware that is OOo Calc.
Your right to your life is primary, and the social application of that is in the right to property - the right to do with the product of your mind as you please.
I really don't see how the right to property follows from the right to life. Especially with the concept of private property ever expanding (real estate, intellectual property, business property,...).
Legislation doesn't protect rights. Legislation sets the laws that are protected and upholded by courts and police/military.
That doesn't make much sense to me either. First of all, the US constitution is a legislative act. What is the purpose of the Bill of Rights if not to protect individual's rights by stating the limits of government action? Secondly, I know the Miranda rights were established by SCOTUS, but they could just as easily have been established by Congress. Would they any less protect the right against self-incriminization? These are just two counter-examples to your assertion.
In all fairness, it appears that AP has a much stricter policy re doctored photos. At one point they had banned the US DoD, because they had pasted in an American flag as background for a portrait.
Exactly what harm was done other than exposing how pathetic most journalism outfits really are? And how, exactly, does it compare to *killing* somebody?
Whatever. I could point out that I mentioned books and the arts and not model planes, but why bother? You just like talking out of your ass. Didn't I mention distribution was illegal? Nobody is stopping you from painting your model planes however you want, though. Waiting for the story how the man busted you for painting swastikas on your model planes. *crickets*
You don't get it. When an American neonazi hangs a swastika flag in his room, he's simply displaying his ignorance.
When a German neonazi does the same, a map showing Germany's 1939 borders is not far away along with the underlying message that the current government should be discarded and Germany restored to its old borders. Which, of course, means a new war with Poland and a bunch of other countries.
Nazi symbols take on a special meaning in Germany, precisely because nazism is a part of German's history. Context matters.
As far as censoring history books: That's stupid and the law doesn't do that. The arts aren't covered as well. Spielberg can put as much swastikas in his Indiana Jones movies as he wants and it won't be censored. I think the law only covers political expression with these symbols and their distribution.
There's a saying, "Nazism is a crime, not an opinion", which describes how most Germans feel about this. Yeah, it's somewhat hypocritical, but the vast majority think it's justified given Germany's history. People have a knack to compartmentalize like that.
Dude, I can list a few at the top of my head. Workplace safety regulation. Consumer protection laws. Working hours regulation. Sick pay. Paid vacation.
Clearly you don't know what you're talking about. The censorship is specific to symbols that were used by the Nazis 60 years ago. They had their chance to world domination and we're not going to give them another.
Most anti-censorship types I hang out with have no problem with prohibiting the display and distribution of Nazi symbols.
Slashdot Mirror
Time Machine works just fine for daily/weekly/monthly incremental backups that can be disconnected from the machine and taken offsite.
Exactly. MPAA, you might want to finally join the rest of us in the 21st century. Don't be afraid, we're having lot's of fun!
Finally, somebody gets it.
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory there is none and, but in practice...
People are still people and attitudes matter. Or do you think policemen and judges are not?
He was making a point about the differences in the attitudes behind the defense, a quite good one at that.
-1, basic reading comprehension fail
You only have to bike a 25 minutes walk and you complain? Are there no back roads where you live? Hell, I'd take a mountain bike and go cross country and would still make it in no time.
Wearing the right clothes helps. Also, if you have a special meating and really have to look professional, come 10 minutes early to cool down before. You can use the time to go over your agenda or just relax.
There are bicycle bags for that. The good ones cost about 80 Euros and last a lifetime.
What about back roads? That's the beauty of a bike, you can go anywhere.
I'm not suggesting this at all. I question that for example a piece of land that is far removed from a person's home can be their property. It's not that the government should step in and say that you already have enough land and you can't have anymore, but rather that some kind of land (most of it actually) cannot be owned by you in the first place.
This is fair, because it applies to everybody else, too, except to the people that are local to a place.
As far as intellectual property is concerned, even the US constitution explicitly grants the copyright, that further is supposed to be limited! These are not natural rights, the goal is to advance the common good. Personally, I think that the underlying assumption that copyright is helpful in that sense is questionable in todays world where culture advances so rapidly. At least the time limits should be decreased radically to less than a decade.
Look, I'm an amateur photographer slowly trying to turn my hobby into a business. I have no problem giving my shots away for free for non-commercial use once I've been paid for the production of them. I mean, once it's out there, it's out there. I derive so much inspiration from other pictures that I can freely access, so who am I to control how other people access culture?
That's the difference to enjoying the fruits of my labour vs. enjoying the fruits of my mind (ideas). How can I monopolize the latter when I've already given them away by publishing them? I can't have my cake and eat it too.
The same principle applies to free software, BTW.
I haven't used Excel in ages but since it's part of MS Office it's roughly comparable to Calc. Honestly, I could care less about all the bloat that an office suite implies. I'm talking about things like collaboration, versioning, recovery, and so on.
I only use Calc but have to have the complete suite installed. I'm using standalone applications for all my writing and presentation needs. I also have hourly backups.
So what I'm looking for is a standalone FOSS spreadsheet application. Other users have suggested gnumeric, but there's no OS X port and I rather use Calc than run gnumeric in X.
BTW, when I last used Excel the experience was way better than Calc on OS X is now.
IHMO, the operative word in your argument is sustain. I do agree that some measure of private property is necessary, such as a roof over your head (although often it's rented) and the stuff in your home and on you. Basically, what's called personal possessions. But your argument breaks down the further you get away from that. How is owning multiple houses, cars, song rights, whatever necessary for a sustained life?
As to owning the fruits of your mind, that's only been true for the last 300 years or so. People should own the fruits of their labour, something which is not guaranteed today.
I should have mentioned that I'm on OS X and don't run X applications if I can avoid it. I do remember Gnumeric from earlier times though, and I agree that it's quite good.
(Now, if someone could port GnuCash to Cocoa, that'd be great!)
1. Do what FudRucker advises
2. Watch your hose burn down
3. Face charges for arson and possibly battery/manslaughter
4. Go to jail, do not collect $400
5. Profit?
Is this 500K lines of *new* code or *changed* code? If the latter, not bad, if the former, yuck!
Well, for an office suite it probably is. But I find the concept of an office suite fundamentally broken, just like the concept of a personal information manager. I want individual applications and sadly there is no good FOSS spreadsheet that I'm aware of. So I have to put up with the bloatware that is OOo Calc.
I really don't see how the right to property follows from the right to life. Especially with the concept of private property ever expanding (real estate, intellectual property, business property, ...).
That doesn't make much sense to me either. First of all, the US constitution is a legislative act. What is the purpose of the Bill of Rights if not to protect individual's rights by stating the limits of government action? Secondly, I know the Miranda rights were established by SCOTUS, but they could just as easily have been established by Congress. Would they any less protect the right against self-incriminization? These are just two counter-examples to your assertion.
You're right, I had mixed the two up.
In all fairness, it appears that AP has a much stricter policy re doctored photos. At one point they had banned the US DoD, because they had pasted in an American flag as background for a portrait.
Exactly what harm was done other than exposing how pathetic most journalism outfits really are? And how, exactly, does it compare to *killing* somebody?
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21956_Reuters_Doctoring_Photos_from_Beirut&only
This case was widely circulated in the mainstream media and, IIRC, the photographer who cloned in the additional smoke was subsequently fired.
Whatever. I could point out that I mentioned books and the arts and not model planes, but why bother? You just like talking out of your ass. Didn't I mention distribution was illegal? Nobody is stopping you from painting your model planes however you want, though. Waiting for the story how the man busted you for painting swastikas on your model planes. *crickets*
Now kindly fuck off.
You don't get it. When an American neonazi hangs a swastika flag in his room, he's simply displaying his ignorance.
When a German neonazi does the same, a map showing Germany's 1939 borders is not far away along with the underlying message that the current government should be discarded and Germany restored to its old borders. Which, of course, means a new war with Poland and a bunch of other countries.
Nazi symbols take on a special meaning in Germany, precisely because nazism is a part of German's history. Context matters.
As far as censoring history books: That's stupid and the law doesn't do that. The arts aren't covered as well. Spielberg can put as much swastikas in his Indiana Jones movies as he wants and it won't be censored. I think the law only covers political expression with these symbols and their distribution.
There's a saying, "Nazism is a crime, not an opinion", which describes how most Germans feel about this. Yeah, it's somewhat hypocritical, but the vast majority think it's justified given Germany's history. People have a knack to compartmentalize like that.
Are you CIA or NSA? No wonder AQ fooled you.
Dude, I can list a few at the top of my head. Workplace safety regulation. Consumer protection laws. Working hours regulation. Sick pay. Paid vacation.
For one, a much better shot at getting elected, if the recent increase in registration can be translated into actual votes.
Clearly you don't know what you're talking about. The censorship is specific to symbols that were used by the Nazis 60 years ago. They had their chance to world domination and we're not going to give them another.
Most anti-censorship types I hang out with have no problem with prohibiting the display and distribution of Nazi symbols.