If you read the summary that strider sent and parse it correctly you will see that he simply says, "... several thermal compounds that claim to have 99% pure silver content.... do not, in fact, contain any silver at all!..."
Why worry about what the maker really means about silver content when the maker is a complete liar? If they are lying about the content of thier compound, do you believe their performance claims? It's likely that the brands that fail to contain no silver at all have anything shoved into them willy nilly depending on what silver looking thing is cheapest and performance is variably dismal. Published tests of those brands should be disregarded because what you buy is probably not what was tested.
Am I the only one, who thinks IBM gets too much free advertising on./ lately?
No, troll, you are not the only one. Bill Gates wants you to be thinking of his crap instead. He does not care if you hate it or love it, so long as it occupies your thoughts. You and he must be crying everytime Slashdot writes presents anything else. I, on the other hand, am glad to read about anything but that crap that I don't use except when forced. As fewer and fewer people are forced to use that crap, there will be less and less to think about. Your task master will return to his former irrelavent state.
IBM, on the other hand, is entirely relavent. They are and making lots of money off free software without having to close it up or control freak it. IBM and others are in a position to offer the world much greater quality software at much lower cost than any closed source code vendor. Closed source crap has been dead for a while. IBM is not here to defend, assail or even mention it. IBM is here to burry the rotten corpse and anyone still clinging to it. Take notice or die.
It seems to me that there is a huge untapped market overseas. The traditional distribution mechanisms are even more disadvantaged when compared to online stores, as the cost of transporting physical goods is significantly greater than moving a digital copy.
Retail prices have nothing to do with actual costs and everything to do with price fixing in a non competitive, rigged, market. Everything else is made in China, blank media, jewel cases, offset printing, you don't really think big run CDs are published in the USA do you? Even if you do opt for a small US art house run of 1,000 CDs, the price is 50 cents to a dollar each. Larger runs of millions are obviously cheaper and the cost of a boat ride to and from Asia is about $300 and negligable per unit. The primary reason CDs and music cost what it does is because it can.
Most of the money you spend goes to crap you don't really want to pay for.
If you get a company cell phone, does the company have the right control the rules on who may locate you?
The company should have that right, NOT the phone compnay. What kind of company wants to have third partees tracking their employees? Do you think someone like a diamond merchant could tollerate such a thing? The same rules, of course apply to individually owned phones. If you don't control it, you don't really own it, do you?
This is just one more reason that all software on all devices should be free software. As long as people will accept being screwed, there's a long line of assholes waiting thier turn to do it to them. So XP is an example how easy it is to enslave the ignorant. Monopoly ownership of cell phone fanchises necessitate short term measures, like tin foil pouches, to enjoy the benefits of cell phones until they too are liberated.
Don't cover the airbag! Safety first.
on
The Star Wars Car
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I recomend nothing at all on the stearing wheel airbag. Anyone who's seen the films of airbag tests gone wrong knows that airbags are ticky and mods must be tested.
If you must, use something light. Paper decals secured with water based glue might not hurt you, but even then you are pushing your luck. Solvent based glue or paint is almost certian to screw up airbag deployment and heavy objects will be embeded in your face.
Yeah, yeah, I sound like a ninny. Old cars did not have aribags at all. They used to kill and injure people more often too. What's that one piece of the mod worth to you? I'd feel really stupid if I or one of my friends was ever hurt more than they had to be in an accident just for looks and fantasy.
As for the rest of it, it's wonderful. All I can ask more of it is that it's all secure and won't fall off in front of someone who will then freak out and kill someone.
That said, I drive a 1970 VW camper van. No airbags, manual stearing, no power assisted breaks, and me six inches behind the front bumper. You can hear large bugs impact on the front pannel. It scares the hell out of me and I'm very careful with it. I'm not, however, going to defeat any of it's safety systems, like seat belts, and I've put in later manufactured seats with head rests. One day, people with think cars without navicomps are downright reckless. I'll feel much safer as they will not be able to pull out in front of me anymore.
companies... that buy these boxes are buying them for the OS and rarely for the groundbreaking hardware.
Sun has not made cutting edge hardware? Yeah, there's plenty of legacy stuff that works with Solaris, but Sun hardware has always been superior. Their busses have always kicked ass, which was good because your typically use Sun for big ugly data crunching and need the troughput. Oh yeah, Sun also used nice SCSI for large and fast storage. These dinky blade boxes with PCI and IDE crap don't do the name justice.
It's never a suprised that people on slashdot just don't get Sun equipment.
Would you please enlighten me? I've got no idea why someone would want one of these blades. If you have software that has not been ported over to GNU, you could just use x86 Solaris or purchase a real Sun used.
If Sun's goal is to comoditize thier hardware, they need to ditch the AMD windoze hunchback and embrace free software. They could steal most of the Xenon server market if they did this. Yes, it's very difficult to get data from the cheap XP box to your nice Sun. The answer is to convince people that a GNU box works better than an XP box for any and all work related computing. Then they have their pick of ssh and all the traditional Unix networking software.
With all the advertising those goons at the RIAA have given the concept, there are few people who have not heard about file sharing. When you tell people that a 12 year old girl in the housing projects can have thousands of songs on her PC, people understand that there's nothing out there that they can't find free of charge. Do they expect people not to go try it out after all that publicity?
They have also critically damaged people's sympathy to them. If 100 year copyrights were not bad enough, threatening 12 year olds and grandparents was. Few people have any sympathy for publishers who are making money off dead artists, artists they hardly pay and stuff they could have recorded off the radio 40 years ago. Everyone knows that music recorded in 1902 paid for itself by 1903 and the big publishers are nothing but greedy control freaks.
The continued rise of file sharing spells the end of the 5 big dumb music publishers. Music is being libreated from it's comercial clutches and all sorts of wonderful acts will flourish and profit without those goons in the way. People basking in a variety of music and cultural service the comercial world never delivered will not put RIAA chains back on. They will understand they were right and when the money goes from the RIAA, so too goes their propaganda and fewer and fewer people will be mislead. Good riddance.
The very concept of "just like us" is wrongheaded . I've had this conversation before. Some people have wrongly projected the influence of TV on the US into what the internet will do to the world. They predict a growing uniformity of culture and are dead wrong. Unlike bulky and expensive broadcast technology, the internet gives everyone the abiltity to expres and preserve their cultures on an equal footing. Different is good and we should respect that.
There are many things that are subjective and cannot and should not be reconciled. Dogs are my favorite example. Differnt people have bred different animals according to their taste. I doubt seriously that people will adopt some kind of universal and average dog. The same can be said of human beauty. We are different looking because we selct each other for what we desire. Broadcast technology did much to damage people's self respect, but the proliferation of technology will restore it. People will present themselves as they see fit and it will be wonderful.
The issues that most of us hope will proliferate already exist in most of the modern religions. Love your neighbor as yourself and the universal brother hood of man are concepts that most people profess. Given time and resources, people can actually practice such concepts.
Could it happen that some day spamming techniques or "spammers" will be hired by people who want to exercise their free speech ?
The whole point of repression is to make people think and do what you want. "Spammers" sending the wrong message and those tolerating it will be hunted down. Real spam will thrive, however. It's co-opted by the state which owns all media anyway.
a banner ad pops up for a non-Playboy adult-oriented site, how is that not trademark infringement?
Playboy's tradmark involves a goofey rabbit and typeface. Tell me how my search engine is supposed to know the difference between that and the common word.
If I own a titty bar, am I violating tradmark if I order my barker to say, "Playboys come this way"? What's the difference between that and adwords? Isn't that the association that drove Heffner to chose the word for his magazine in the first place? It's not like the banner ad is putting the actual trade marks up or my titty bar claims to be run by Heffner.
Linux" is TM to Linus Torvalds. The poster who thinks these judges decision is a "shame". I wonder if "Linux" were being used to drive search engine clients to Microsoft, Open/Free/NetBSD or whomever, would the politically correct (/.) views be different?
No, dumbfuck and I'll go even further. I don't think Linus would have a problem if Microsoft used the keyword "Linux" in thier web pages about TCO. That's all "adwords" are. Words that actually existed before the company are even more repulsive targets of corporate ownership.
"Playboy" was a word before the magazine. The company's attempt to restrain all comercial use of the word is wrong headed. No one is going to confuse the average porn site for Playboy's, though they mostly don't care. Playboy's brand name has been eroded by competition, not tradmark infringment. They won't get what they had back even if they could, by some state sponsored black magic or Paladium, insure that no one but their authors could even use the word. They are just another bunch of pimps.
Clearly, something monumental must be going on in the world of computing for these technology titans simultaneously to discover something that is so profound and yet so hard to name.
Something profound is happening and it is hard to explain. Computing on demand, I like it. Still, it's hard for people to really get it.
Terms don't work very well. I've told them about apt-get, dselect and aptitude, but they get lost.
Showing them the tools in action is impressive, but they still don't get it. I've demonstrated apt-get and dselect and it's generally impressive. Changing out Exim for Sendmail flawlessly and remotely without reboot was kind of cool and impressed several people at work once. A demonstration of dselect came tantalizingly close to clueing in my brother in law. At first he was unimpressed with all the software he saw listed because he is used to music sharing programs. His eyes nearly poped out of his head when I told him that all of that software was free and inteneded to be by the authors. He still lacked an apreciation for the quality of the software and has yet to get it. Aptitude, while it may be easier to use and put a pretty face on the process will have about the same result.
No, I'm afraid that the only way people will understand that there is a vast collection of software ready to fill any and all of their computing needs is for them to use it. Free software, to me, is the ultimate computing on demand, co-operative utility type computing. The abiltiy to demand only comes from control and control only comes from freedom.
The candy available from the NOT net and all the other followers of Netscape's browser and remote desktop computing are nothing in the face of free computing.
Really now? While this sounds great to spout off in the slashdot forums, please show me something to back this up.
US broadband adoption is behind many other less afluent countries. Korea, Japan and others make the US look pathetic. Even the UK is getting a leg up on the US. The wires are here, the money is here, the only reason broadband is not here is due to stupid laws created by big dumb companies that have yet to figure out how to own the internet.
Oh crap, did I forget my sarcasm metatags? No wait, should have been troll hehe...Let's just see who knee-jerk replies before reading down this far:)
ha, ha, lame.
The problem is that some people really do think like that. Your time would be better spent thinking of short concise statements that they can understand than jerking people here around.
Here are some starters:
Computers are another form of printing press. Requiring a license for them would be a violation of the first amendment to the constitution and very unAmerican. P2P is as American as Ben Franklin.
100 year copyright laws are essentially perpetual and a violation of the time limited requirements of copyright's constitutional charter.
Yes, a Summit will work! Already through the power of talking-about-things we have eliminated AIDS, poverty and global polution! Now we must turn this formidable weapon to bear on copyright theft!
Yes it's true, the only way to enforce copyright law is through propaganda. Copyright, unlike all of those other things, depends on individual self restraint and respect for authors and publishers. It would be wonderful indeed if we could simply convince people not to be poor or die of AIDS and convince the air to be clean. Hell, propaganda could bring world peeace if only words could multiply the resources that people fight over. The dependence of copyright law on propaganda is even greater as the ease of publication grows in the digital age. People must be convinced that copyright laws are just in order for copyright to work.
The US is one place that should know this is true. Ben Franklin and many other Americans thought English copyright laws were unreasonable and violated them wholsale. For a hundred and fifty years after US judges and citezens scoffed at paying tribute to forgien governments and authors for ideas, songs and other inspiration.
Today it is US copyright laws that are out of wack. The imbalance is not in the technology, it's in 100 year copyrights that are essentially perpetual and the power of big publishers to prevail on US public opinion. The word's five big music publishers, three big broadcasters and one big press organization are losing their governemnt granted control of mass media to the internet. While they can buy biger and dumber copyright laws and have restrained broadband adoption, they are having a hard time convincing people they are right about things. I'm afraid this Summit will recomend more stupid limits on technology and attempt to justify them with people's failure to be convinced that copyright laws are ethical, just or reasonable.
Fefe, you just wrote one of the most insulting posts I've seen in a long time and it's inemical to free software in general. You crap on DeadSea's work and the whole idea of software freedom. To add insult to injury, because DeadSea complains of being violated, you compare him to the lowest scum on Earth: Microsoft, SCO and junk patent advocates. Your troll is so excellently crafted, it's obvious that you know what you are doing, so what follows is for peopole who might not understand your methods.
You reveal the root of your contempt, and it's resulting ridicule right here:
1. Java can be trivially decompiled, so I don't see how this can be regarded as "closed source" with a straight face.
It's obvious that you don't understand or have forgoten software freedom and have a very bad elitist atitude. The point of the GPL is that the others can read and understand code that you write or modify. The GPL demands distribution in HUMAN READABLE form, complete with all of the original notes. While you might think yourself above the need for comments, that's beside the point. The GPL does not require you to pander, it simply asks you to pass on what you recieved. Stripping information is a clear violation of the spirit and letter of the GPL.
Your second insult should be aimed at the violators:
2. Your library does not look like rocket science to me.
If it was so easy, why was the code appropriated? When the company appropriated the code, why did they bother to strip information from it? Someone so uber-leet as yourself would never sink so low, would you? Real men like might not mind putting in long hours reinventing the wheel, but I do. When you use someone else's code, the least you can do is honor the license it's under.
Your final comments are the most insulting of all:
you only make yourself look bad and give SCO and Microsoft ammunition on why free software people are communists and morally corrupt people.
What a stupid blast. Just try reverse engineering something from Microsoft and distributing it. The answer you get will be most unreasonable. It's surprising indeed that someone from Germany would call someone a Communist, especially someone who would so fiercly advocates software freedom.
What could be more helpful to closed source than to convince free software writers to keep quiet about GPL violations? The losers obviously can't keep up. If we are silent and just let people have their way when our code is "stolen" we might as well take orders about software development straight from Redmond. It would be better to hand over your copright to anyone else.
KYLE'S MOTHER: Then we'll have to resort to plan B and call the v-chip organization.
Dramatic MUSIC STING. Mackey looks afraid.
MR. MACKEY Mrs. Brovlofski, the V-chip hasn't been fully tested yet, it could be dangerous.
KYLE'S MOTHER (Evil) I don't care if it's dangerous! Desperate times call for desperate measures, Mr. Mackey. Perhaps I need to remind you of your situation.
MR. MACKEY (Nervous) Alright, I'll make the call...
KYLE'S MOTHER As our next official order of business here at M.A.C., we will test the new V-chip. As most of you know, the V-chip was
created to lock children out of watching certain shows on television. And now the N.I.H. has created a new, exciting product that they can tell us all about. Here is the Surgeon General, Dr. Pangloss.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS, a lab technician in white takes the podium.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Thank you, parents. One person claps. Pangloss hits a button and a slide projector starts showing pictures of the device.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS The machinery of the new 'V-chip' is very simple, and similar to that of the V- chip. The chip is placed just under the subject's skin, where it emits a small but painful shock of electricity whenever an obscenity is uttered.
The parents are fascinated.
STAN'S FATHER Now wait a minute, are you telling us that this chip somehow KNOWS if the kid
is swearing?
The parents AD LIB 'Ooohs' and 'Ahhhhs'
DOCTOR PANGLOSS We are very excited to see the results of this test. (Calling) Patient 453, would you step out here, please?
Cartman steps out wearing a hospital gown.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Patient 453 here has been fitted with the new v-chip...
CARTMAN My head hurts.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Don't worry about that. Now, I want you to say 'Doggy.'
CARTMAN Doggy.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Notice that nothing happens. (To Cartman) Now say 'Montana.'
CARTMAN Montana.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Good. Now 'Pillow'.
CARTMAN Pillow
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Alright, now I want you to say 'horsefucker.'
Cartman looks offstage to his mother.
CARTMAN'S MOTHER Go ahead, it's alright, Eric.
Cartman smiles.
CARTMAN Horsefuck-BZZZZZAAAAT!!!!
CARTMAN AGAAHGAHGAH!!!!!
Cartman falls to the floor in pain. All the parents ooh and ahh and applaud.
CARTMAN OW!! That HURT GOD DAMMI-BAZAAATTT!!
CARTMAN OW!! YOU CAN'T DO THIS TO ME!! THIS ISN'T FAIR!!! YOU SONS A BITCHE--BAZAAATTT!!
With the collusion and price fixing all these new centralized databases make possible, you will have a bad credit record when you get where you are going. Air travel has been a rape for about five years and it's getting worse. The body cavity search and big brother knowing where you are going is only half as painful as the wallet emptying proceedure knows as ticket purchase. If the feds refuse to reign in those thieves, and even ecourage them in the interests of "national security", is it any wonder they don't mind if the same theives are sloppy with your social secutity number and everything else needed to steal everything you own?
Blatant lies are generally considered flamebait, but I'm looking for someone to show the relative merits of the file formats again. The order of quality and efficiency generally leaves WMA on the bottom.
Let's quote his introduction again. He's clear about what he's saying:
... when the IPv6 rollout is finally done, not all the effects will be positive: the new Version 6 Internet will be slower, more friendly to peer-to-peer-based copyright violation systems, and the computers on it will almost certainly be less secure.
Looks like a slam to me. Stupid and wrong but a slam just the same. The man is a Ludite and I'll never have much respect for MIT Technology Review again. The article is pure FUD and flamebait.
MIT must be mortified their name is associated with that rag. I predict Garfinkel's removal, a shake up, or the removal of the ability to use the name by the magazine over this.
the worst thing that could happen here is for IBM to publically commit to Linux on the desktop by 2005 throughout its organization and fail to deliver on that promise.
They already committed in Munich. There's no going back. They either believe what they say or they don't take advantage of free software in house. They can't have it both ways.
The chances of failure, by the way, are slim to none.
Since they still sell Windows and sell consulting services for Windows customers, they want to make it clear they aren't biased against Windows if that is what the customer wants.
It's not bias. They made a decision based on judgement. That's what consultants do and are paid for. It's going to work for them and they will be able to help you if you want it to work for you.
The decision was that Microsoft had no place in their business, but your business might be different. Stranger things have happened. They can still help you out with Windoze if you want, it's what they were using and they will keep a few people on staff well versed in eXPensive, easily broken crap.
Oh dear, I'm letting my knowledge, I mean bias, shine through.
Slashdot Mirror
Why worry about what the maker really means about silver content when the maker is a complete liar? If they are lying about the content of thier compound, do you believe their performance claims? It's likely that the brands that fail to contain no silver at all have anything shoved into them willy nilly depending on what silver looking thing is cheapest and performance is variably dismal. Published tests of those brands should be disregarded because what you buy is probably not what was tested.
Am I the only one, who thinks IBM gets too much free advertising on ./ lately?
No, troll, you are not the only one. Bill Gates wants you to be thinking of his crap instead. He does not care if you hate it or love it, so long as it occupies your thoughts. You and he must be crying everytime Slashdot writes presents anything else. I, on the other hand, am glad to read about anything but that crap that I don't use except when forced. As fewer and fewer people are forced to use that crap, there will be less and less to think about. Your task master will return to his former irrelavent state.
IBM, on the other hand, is entirely relavent. They are and making lots of money off free software without having to close it up or control freak it. IBM and others are in a position to offer the world much greater quality software at much lower cost than any closed source code vendor. Closed source crap has been dead for a while. IBM is not here to defend, assail or even mention it. IBM is here to burry the rotten corpse and anyone still clinging to it. Take notice or die.
Retail prices have nothing to do with actual costs and everything to do with price fixing in a non competitive, rigged, market. Everything else is made in China, blank media, jewel cases, offset printing, you don't really think big run CDs are published in the USA do you? Even if you do opt for a small US art house run of 1,000 CDs, the price is 50 cents to a dollar each. Larger runs of millions are obviously cheaper and the cost of a boat ride to and from Asia is about $300 and negligable per unit. The primary reason CDs and music cost what it does is because it can.
Most of the money you spend goes to crap you don't really want to pay for.
The company should have that right, NOT the phone compnay. What kind of company wants to have third partees tracking their employees? Do you think someone like a diamond merchant could tollerate such a thing? The same rules, of course apply to individually owned phones. If you don't control it, you don't really own it, do you?
This is just one more reason that all software on all devices should be free software. As long as people will accept being screwed, there's a long line of assholes waiting thier turn to do it to them. So XP is an example how easy it is to enslave the ignorant. Monopoly ownership of cell phone fanchises necessitate short term measures, like tin foil pouches, to enjoy the benefits of cell phones until they too are liberated.
If you must, use something light. Paper decals secured with water based glue might not hurt you, but even then you are pushing your luck. Solvent based glue or paint is almost certian to screw up airbag deployment and heavy objects will be embeded in your face.
Yeah, yeah, I sound like a ninny. Old cars did not have aribags at all. They used to kill and injure people more often too. What's that one piece of the mod worth to you? I'd feel really stupid if I or one of my friends was ever hurt more than they had to be in an accident just for looks and fantasy.
As for the rest of it, it's wonderful. All I can ask more of it is that it's all secure and won't fall off in front of someone who will then freak out and kill someone.
That said, I drive a 1970 VW camper van. No airbags, manual stearing, no power assisted breaks, and me six inches behind the front bumper. You can hear large bugs impact on the front pannel. It scares the hell out of me and I'm very careful with it. I'm not, however, going to defeat any of it's safety systems, like seat belts, and I've put in later manufactured seats with head rests. One day, people with think cars without navicomps are downright reckless. I'll feel much safer as they will not be able to pull out in front of me anymore.
Sun has not made cutting edge hardware? Yeah, there's plenty of legacy stuff that works with Solaris, but Sun hardware has always been superior. Their busses have always kicked ass, which was good because your typically use Sun for big ugly data crunching and need the troughput. Oh yeah, Sun also used nice SCSI for large and fast storage. These dinky blade boxes with PCI and IDE crap don't do the name justice.
It's never a suprised that people on slashdot just don't get Sun equipment.
Would you please enlighten me? I've got no idea why someone would want one of these blades. If you have software that has not been ported over to GNU, you could just use x86 Solaris or purchase a real Sun used.
If Sun's goal is to comoditize thier hardware, they need to ditch the AMD windoze hunchback and embrace free software. They could steal most of the Xenon server market if they did this. Yes, it's very difficult to get data from the cheap XP box to your nice Sun. The answer is to convince people that a GNU box works better than an XP box for any and all work related computing. Then they have their pick of ssh and all the traditional Unix networking software.
They have also critically damaged people's sympathy to them. If 100 year copyrights were not bad enough, threatening 12 year olds and grandparents was. Few people have any sympathy for publishers who are making money off dead artists, artists they hardly pay and stuff they could have recorded off the radio 40 years ago. Everyone knows that music recorded in 1902 paid for itself by 1903 and the big publishers are nothing but greedy control freaks.
The continued rise of file sharing spells the end of the 5 big dumb music publishers. Music is being libreated from it's comercial clutches and all sorts of wonderful acts will flourish and profit without those goons in the way. People basking in a variety of music and cultural service the comercial world never delivered will not put RIAA chains back on. They will understand they were right and when the money goes from the RIAA, so too goes their propaganda and fewer and fewer people will be mislead. Good riddance.
Better than GW Bush?
Better than you write, that's for sure.
Does anyone else consider this topic to be implicitly racist?
No, ding-a-ling. Islam's got it's own thing going on and Saudi Arabia is where it comes from. Get a clue - not everyone thinks like you do.
It's not what you don't know. It's what you don't know you don't know that's overwhelming.
The very concept of "just like us" is wrongheaded . I've had this conversation before. Some people have wrongly projected the influence of TV on the US into what the internet will do to the world. They predict a growing uniformity of culture and are dead wrong. Unlike bulky and expensive broadcast technology, the internet gives everyone the abiltity to expres and preserve their cultures on an equal footing. Different is good and we should respect that.
There are many things that are subjective and cannot and should not be reconciled. Dogs are my favorite example. Differnt people have bred different animals according to their taste. I doubt seriously that people will adopt some kind of universal and average dog. The same can be said of human beauty. We are different looking because we selct each other for what we desire. Broadcast technology did much to damage people's self respect, but the proliferation of technology will restore it. People will present themselves as they see fit and it will be wonderful.
The issues that most of us hope will proliferate already exist in most of the modern religions. Love your neighbor as yourself and the universal brother hood of man are concepts that most people profess. Given time and resources, people can actually practice such concepts.
The whole point of repression is to make people think and do what you want. "Spammers" sending the wrong message and those tolerating it will be hunted down. Real spam will thrive, however. It's co-opted by the state which owns all media anyway.
a banner ad pops up for a non-Playboy adult-oriented site, how is that not trademark infringement?
Playboy's tradmark involves a goofey rabbit and typeface. Tell me how my search engine is supposed to know the difference between that and the common word.
If I own a titty bar, am I violating tradmark if I order my barker to say, "Playboys come this way"? What's the difference between that and adwords? Isn't that the association that drove Heffner to chose the word for his magazine in the first place? It's not like the banner ad is putting the actual trade marks up or my titty bar claims to be run by Heffner.
No, dumbfuck and I'll go even further. I don't think Linus would have a problem if Microsoft used the keyword "Linux" in thier web pages about TCO. That's all "adwords" are. Words that actually existed before the company are even more repulsive targets of corporate ownership.
"Playboy" was a word before the magazine. The company's attempt to restrain all comercial use of the word is wrong headed. No one is going to confuse the average porn site for Playboy's, though they mostly don't care. Playboy's brand name has been eroded by competition, not tradmark infringment. They won't get what they had back even if they could, by some state sponsored black magic or Paladium, insure that no one but their authors could even use the word. They are just another bunch of pimps.
Something profound is happening and it is hard to explain. Computing on demand, I like it. Still, it's hard for people to really get it.
Terms don't work very well. I've told them about apt-get, dselect and aptitude, but they get lost.
Showing them the tools in action is impressive, but they still don't get it. I've demonstrated apt-get and dselect and it's generally impressive. Changing out Exim for Sendmail flawlessly and remotely without reboot was kind of cool and impressed several people at work once. A demonstration of dselect came tantalizingly close to clueing in my brother in law. At first he was unimpressed with all the software he saw listed because he is used to music sharing programs. His eyes nearly poped out of his head when I told him that all of that software was free and inteneded to be by the authors. He still lacked an apreciation for the quality of the software and has yet to get it. Aptitude, while it may be easier to use and put a pretty face on the process will have about the same result.
No, I'm afraid that the only way people will understand that there is a vast collection of software ready to fill any and all of their computing needs is for them to use it. Free software, to me, is the ultimate computing on demand, co-operative utility type computing. The abiltiy to demand only comes from control and control only comes from freedom.
The candy available from the NOT net and all the other followers of Netscape's browser and remote desktop computing are nothing in the face of free computing.
US broadband adoption is behind many other less afluent countries. Korea, Japan and others make the US look pathetic. Even the UK is getting a leg up on the US. The wires are here, the money is here, the only reason broadband is not here is due to stupid laws created by big dumb companies that have yet to figure out how to own the internet.
ha, ha, lame.
The problem is that some people really do think like that. Your time would be better spent thinking of short concise statements that they can understand than jerking people here around.
Here are some starters:
Yes it's true, the only way to enforce copyright law is through propaganda. Copyright, unlike all of those other things, depends on individual self restraint and respect for authors and publishers. It would be wonderful indeed if we could simply convince people not to be poor or die of AIDS and convince the air to be clean. Hell, propaganda could bring world peeace if only words could multiply the resources that people fight over. The dependence of copyright law on propaganda is even greater as the ease of publication grows in the digital age. People must be convinced that copyright laws are just in order for copyright to work.
The US is one place that should know this is true. Ben Franklin and many other Americans thought English copyright laws were unreasonable and violated them wholsale. For a hundred and fifty years after US judges and citezens scoffed at paying tribute to forgien governments and authors for ideas, songs and other inspiration.
Today it is US copyright laws that are out of wack. The imbalance is not in the technology, it's in 100 year copyrights that are essentially perpetual and the power of big publishers to prevail on US public opinion. The word's five big music publishers, three big broadcasters and one big press organization are losing their governemnt granted control of mass media to the internet. While they can buy biger and dumber copyright laws and have restrained broadband adoption, they are having a hard time convincing people they are right about things. I'm afraid this Summit will recomend more stupid limits on technology and attempt to justify them with people's failure to be convinced that copyright laws are ethical, just or reasonable.
Daryl belongs in jail, like other extortionist and frauds. His "head on a platter" is a little to extreem a punishment.
You reveal the root of your contempt, and it's resulting ridicule right here:
1. Java can be trivially decompiled, so I don't see how this can be regarded as "closed source" with a straight face.
It's obvious that you don't understand or have forgoten software freedom and have a very bad elitist atitude. The point of the GPL is that the others can read and understand code that you write or modify. The GPL demands distribution in HUMAN READABLE form, complete with all of the original notes. While you might think yourself above the need for comments, that's beside the point. The GPL does not require you to pander, it simply asks you to pass on what you recieved. Stripping information is a clear violation of the spirit and letter of the GPL.
Your second insult should be aimed at the violators:
2. Your library does not look like rocket science to me.
If it was so easy, why was the code appropriated? When the company appropriated the code, why did they bother to strip information from it? Someone so uber-leet as yourself would never sink so low, would you? Real men like might not mind putting in long hours reinventing the wheel, but I do. When you use someone else's code, the least you can do is honor the license it's under.
Your final comments are the most insulting of all:
you only make yourself look bad and give SCO and Microsoft ammunition on why free software people are communists and morally corrupt people.
What a stupid blast. Just try reverse engineering something from Microsoft and distributing it. The answer you get will be most unreasonable. It's surprising indeed that someone from Germany would call someone a Communist, especially someone who would so fiercly advocates software freedom.
What could be more helpful to closed source than to convince free software writers to keep quiet about GPL violations? The losers obviously can't keep up. If we are silent and just let people have their way when our code is "stolen" we might as well take orders about software development straight from Redmond. It would be better to hand over your copright to anyone else.
KYLE'S MOTHER: Then we'll have to resort to plan B and call the v-chip organization.
Dramatic MUSIC STING. Mackey looks afraid.
MR. MACKEY Mrs. Brovlofski, the V-chip hasn't been fully tested yet, it could be dangerous.
KYLE'S MOTHER (Evil) I don't care if it's dangerous! Desperate times call for desperate measures, Mr. Mackey. Perhaps I need to remind you of your situation.
MR. MACKEY (Nervous) Alright, I'll make the call...
KYLE'S MOTHER As our next official order of business here at M.A.C., we will test the new V-chip. As most of you know, the V-chip was created to lock children out of watching certain shows on television. And now the N.I.H. has created a new, exciting product that they can tell us all about. Here is the Surgeon General, Dr. Pangloss.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS, a lab technician in white takes the podium.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Thank you, parents. One person claps. Pangloss hits a button and a slide projector starts showing pictures of the device.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS The machinery of the new 'V-chip' is very simple, and similar to that of the V- chip. The chip is placed just under the subject's skin, where it emits a small but painful shock of electricity whenever an obscenity is uttered.
The parents are fascinated.
STAN'S FATHER Now wait a minute, are you telling us that this chip somehow KNOWS if the kid is swearing?
The parents AD LIB 'Ooohs' and 'Ahhhhs'
DOCTOR PANGLOSS We are very excited to see the results of this test. (Calling) Patient 453, would you step out here, please?
Cartman steps out wearing a hospital gown.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Patient 453 here has been fitted with the new v-chip...
CARTMAN My head hurts.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Don't worry about that. Now, I want you to say 'Doggy.'
CARTMAN Doggy.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Notice that nothing happens. (To Cartman) Now say 'Montana.'
CARTMAN Montana.
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Good. Now 'Pillow'.
CARTMAN Pillow
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Alright, now I want you to say 'horsefucker.'
Cartman looks offstage to his mother.
CARTMAN'S MOTHER Go ahead, it's alright, Eric.
Cartman smiles.
CARTMAN Horsefuck-BZZZZZAAAAT!!!!
CARTMAN AGAAHGAHGAH!!!!!
Cartman falls to the floor in pain. All the parents ooh and ahh and applaud.
CARTMAN OW!! That HURT GOD DAMMI-BAZAAATTT!!
CARTMAN OW!! YOU CAN'T DO THIS TO ME!! THIS ISN'T FAIR!!! YOU SONS A BITCHE--BAZAAATTT!!
DOCTOR PANGLOSS Success!!
Why complain? I like that quote. It let's me know that there's nothing of value in the article and saves me the trouble of reading it. Good night.
Blatant lies are generally considered flamebait, but I'm looking for someone to show the relative merits of the file formats again. The order of quality and efficiency generally leaves WMA on the bottom.
Looks like a slam to me. Stupid and wrong but a slam just the same. The man is a Ludite and I'll never have much respect for MIT Technology Review again. The article is pure FUD and flamebait.
MIT must be mortified their name is associated with that rag. I predict Garfinkel's removal, a shake up, or the removal of the ability to use the name by the magazine over this.
They already committed in Munich. There's no going back. They either believe what they say or they don't take advantage of free software in house. They can't have it both ways.
The chances of failure, by the way, are slim to none.
It's not bias. They made a decision based on judgement. That's what consultants do and are paid for. It's going to work for them and they will be able to help you if you want it to work for you.
The decision was that Microsoft had no place in their business, but your business might be different. Stranger things have happened. They can still help you out with Windoze if you want, it's what they were using and they will keep a few people on staff well versed in eXPensive, easily broken crap.
Oh dear, I'm letting my knowledge, I mean bias, shine through.