Can he have whatever policies he chooses himself in what ethnic groups not to hire people from?
If you'll check, you'll find that he indeed has that right under the Constitution. We as a society have chosen to pass laws removing that right. I support that decision.
The fact that I support it does not make it implicit in the Constitution, however. In fact, even the government could restrict your Constitutionally-protected rights until 1870, when the 15th Amendment added new protections.
So the price of liberty is poverty? Great values system buddy.
How does my value system enter into a decision made 225 years ago by a bunch of guys to whom I'm not even related?
However, yes, sometimes the price of liberty is poverty. Sometimes it's even death. Didn't you learn this stuff in Civics in grade school?
You have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. You do NOT have the right to be employed by any particular employer. Indeed, if you did, that would necessarily be a heavy restriction of that employer's right to have anybody working for him he wants, or to not have them. Your rights aren't any more important than his.
After all, they can fire you for exercising your free speech, can't they? Or your freedom of the press?
It should come as no shock in a discussion of reducing liberty to enhance security that the converse is also true.
You should make it so that ACs are -1, UNLESS the post has been moderated up, in which case it'd be shown as it's true rating.
That option would allow AC posting to do what it is supposed to do (allow people to post information that could get them in trouble) while still allowing us to filter the jackasses.
First off, they link off to a site that talks about using Procmail to filter spam.
But Procmail says you should use MAPS...
...second, I love this quote:
Anti-spam blacklisting groups, such as MAPS and ORBs, put heavy pressure on ISPs to conform to a set of restrictive anti-spam policies and to virally pressure other ISPs to adopt the same policies.
Yeah, those nasty folks at MAPS, they force you to conform a restrictive anti-spam policy, to whit: stop letting your users send spam.
Oooo, I'm being repressed! Come see the violence inherent in the system!
Each vendor puts everything on different menus, for a start.
Hell, HP puts everything in different places between releases of the OS. Sometimes within patch levels of the same release...
Half our developers run GNOME on their Solaris development servers. The guys in charge of the devel environment (I'm production, thank the maker) had to go ahead and install it because each developer was putting it in his own home directory and using up a crapload of diskspace. They couldn't get anything done with CDE.
If they use the Intsil (sp?) PRISM chipset or something compatible enough, perhaps the drivers from the Linux WLAN project may work.
If not, I bet Mark's planning to make 'em work.
Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!
on
EU May Fine Microsoft
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
My definition of a monopoly must be something else than yours.
That was the entire point.
I already am happily using Linux and BSD.
Which underscores my point that they're not a monopoly. Standard Oil was a monopoly; you couldn't buy your oil from anybody else, you didn't have a choice.
You can buy your PC OS from several different places. Microsoft is doing mean, nasty, awful things to get their market share, but preventing people from having a choice in toto is not among them.
Yes, some of the things they've done in the past (and may or may not be doing still, I have an opinion but I'm not gonna bet my ass on it in court) were illegal. The question is, should they have been illegal?
Should a court be able to decide, for instance, that Microsoft can't ship Internet Explorer in Windows? If they do, should it be legal for RedHat to include Mozilla and Lynx?
Do we want a court deciding that? Or does it make more sense in a free society that individuals make those decisions, and that companies be free to enter into contracts.
I'm not talking about click-through UCITA crap here, I'm talking about two marketting and legal teams sitting down and deciding on a contract. The fact that it's hard to compete for specific markets if you don't sign that contract doesn't make someone a monopoly, it makes them successful.
And, it's not illegal to be a monopoly in the US; it's only illegal to be a monopoly *AND* use that power to prevent other options from existing. Since RedHat has revenues in the millions, and Sun has revenues in the billions, it's clear that Microsoft doesn't even have a monopoly, just a very, very successful business built on a foundation of weak software, strong marketting, and duplicity. That's not illegal, nor should it be.
You can't legislate against offering people bad choices just because some people are stupid enough to take them.
The ONLY action the government should take against Microsoft's supposed monopoly is to stop buying their products. If the US government was constrained to use free software wherever possible, it would not only force changes at Microsoft, but it would spur free software development *AND* save the taxpayers money, both in the form of less taxes spent on computer software, *AND* lower costs of goods and services as businesses would see better free software choices themselves.
Documents would eventually have to be interchanged in an open format, so that businesses using Windows could transfer them to and from government entities, and that would force Microsoft to either document what they've got, or use something documented. If Microsoft could write a word processor around those formats that people still wanted to pay for, more power to 'em.
I suspect a fair number of people never try Linux or one of the BSDs because they're moderately happy with AOL as an ISP, and switching OSes would mean switching ISPs at the same time.
You show me five people who say the only thing stopping them from using Linux is AOL, and I'll show you three people who are lying and two who are probably trying it anyway.
Re:Linus sounds awfully tired
on
Torvalds Tells All
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Forlorn hope that the questions will start making sense?
I still don't think those hundreds of folks will agree with your statement that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly.
So what? The mob's opinion is always right?
The majority of people in the world don't live as long as Americans, it doesn't mean I'm gonna give up medicine.
At one time, most people in the world (and it's possible this could still be the case) thought the Earth was flat; they weren't right.
99% of the population of the world hasn't thought three seconds about whether or not Microsoft is a monopoly. They only know what the press tells them, so it became a monopoly in their eyes the minute the press said so.
Meanwhile, the majority of the computer code in the world continues to be written for non-Microsoft operating systems, and I continue to get real work done on a daily basis without Windows, and Microsoft's pricing practices don't bother me one whit. I hope they double the damn price, it'll drive more business to me.
Why not tackle the problem itself? Microsoft is bundling its software to force competition out of the market. Why not force Microsoft to leave IE, Media Player, video editing software, hell even Minesweeper out of the default Windows package? (How much cheaper would it become?:)
Why not just don't choose to purchase Windows yourself? Are you really forced to buy it?
You may be forced to USE it, but the same would be true if your office selected Linux, or Mac, or CP/M.
Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, because you don't *HAVE* to buy their product. This isn't like Standard Oil, where you needed to heat your house to live through the winter.
The problem with StarOffice is that it hasn't completely worked to import/export word/excel documents. Until that day people will never truly be able to switch to it. I would LOVE the company I work for to switch to this software. But until it's completely MSOffice complient nobody can use it.
Yeah, I remember when people said that about Word not replacing Word Perfect.
How hard is it REALLY to parse out Word Documents and have it work????
Hard enough that even Microsoft doesn't always get it right.
Nowhere in the article does it mention creating mini-black-holes. The purpose is to try to create Higgs bosons and to precisely measure their characteristics to get a better handle on how electroweak symmetry breaking works.
Oh, sure, and then the whole world gets shrunk down to the size of a pea, and Stanley never gets to finish having sex with Bunny.
why was X dying? I've never had X die except in the rarest occasions or more routinely on systems I had really futzed with.
I have one system (I'm typing on it now) where X dies about once every three days. No error messages, no core dump, nothing to help me trace why at all. It just goes away.
That's Red Hat 7.1 with all the latest patches, and a Matrox Millennium II AGP board, which isn't exactly weird.
No offence to the US people, but your congressmen are stupid.
Whereas Slovenia is known for being a bastion of common-sense government?
You guys have been a democracy for what, a decade? Don't start throwing around political advice 'til you reach, say, 1/3rd our per-capita GDP and no more than 1.5x our unemployment rate, OK?
You're doing kick-ass on life expectancy and literacy rate, but you're still wet behind the ears, and you've only been off the foreign aid teat for like 8 years. Your inflation is bad, and if that keeps up your foreign debt ratio is not gonna be pretty.
You're probably over the "get stepped on by our neighbors" hump, but you've got a long way to go before you can think about taking business away from us.
The fingerprint idea will basically keep folks entertained at your next 2600 meeting, but it won't keep anybody out of your data other than casual intruders, who would have been just as easily kept out by a BIOS password. This product is snake-oil.
Obviously not. More likely, a key generated at some point in the setup process, and your fingerprint is merely the passphrase to access the key. Same way PGP does it, really.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope the kinder dosent try rocket-jumping with LAWS portable rocket launchers...
Nah, we quit using those, it's those AT-4s we ripped from the Brits now.
Can he have whatever policies he chooses himself in what ethnic groups not to hire people from?
If you'll check, you'll find that he indeed has that right under the Constitution. We as a society have chosen to pass laws removing that right. I support that decision.
The fact that I support it does not make it implicit in the Constitution, however. In fact, even the government could restrict your Constitutionally-protected rights until 1870, when the 15th Amendment added new protections.
So the price of liberty is poverty? Great values system buddy.
How does my value system enter into a decision made 225 years ago by a bunch of guys to whom I'm not even related?
However, yes, sometimes the price of liberty is poverty. Sometimes it's even death. Didn't you learn this stuff in Civics in grade school?
You have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. You do NOT have the right to be employed by any particular employer. Indeed, if you did, that would necessarily be a heavy restriction of that employer's right to have anybody working for him he wants, or to not have them. Your rights aren't any more important than his.
After all, they can fire you for exercising your free speech, can't they? Or your freedom of the press?
It should come as no shock in a discussion of reducing liberty to enhance security that the converse is also true.
You should make it so that ACs are -1, UNLESS the post has been moderated up, in which case it'd be shown as it's true rating.
That option would allow AC posting to do what it is supposed to do (allow people to post information that could get them in trouble) while still allowing us to filter the jackasses.
You have an absolute right to refuse those searches, by terminating your employment.
Either you signed a contract, in which case I guarantee you agreed to searches, or your employment is at-will, and every day is a new contract.
First off, they link off to a site that talks about using Procmail to filter spam.
But Procmail says you should use MAPS...
...second, I love this quote:
Anti-spam blacklisting groups, such as MAPS and ORBs, put heavy pressure on ISPs to conform to a set of restrictive anti-spam policies and to virally pressure other ISPs to adopt the same policies.
Yeah, those nasty folks at MAPS, they force you to conform a restrictive anti-spam policy, to whit: stop letting your users send spam.
Oooo, I'm being repressed! Come see the violence inherent in the system!
Is that a Boston Boskonian, or a Springfield Boskonian?
No, this kind of Boskonian.
Or, more specifically, this kind.
Brendan of the Eich. Clearly a highly-ranked Boskonian.
Each vendor puts everything on different menus, for a start.
Hell, HP puts everything in different places between releases of the OS. Sometimes within patch levels of the same release...
Half our developers run GNOME on their Solaris development servers. The guys in charge of the devel environment (I'm production, thank the maker) had to go ahead and install it because each developer was putting it in his own home directory and using up a crapload of diskspace. They couldn't get anything done with CDE.
If they use the Intsil (sp?) PRISM chipset or something compatible enough, perhaps the drivers from the Linux WLAN project may work.
If not, I bet Mark's planning to make 'em work.
My definition of a monopoly must be something else than yours.
That was the entire point.
I already am happily using Linux and BSD.
Which underscores my point that they're not a monopoly. Standard Oil was a monopoly; you couldn't buy your oil from anybody else, you didn't have a choice.
You can buy your PC OS from several different places. Microsoft is doing mean, nasty, awful things to get their market share, but preventing people from having a choice in toto is not among them.
Yes, some of the things they've done in the past (and may or may not be doing still, I have an opinion but I'm not gonna bet my ass on it in court) were illegal. The question is, should they have been illegal?
Should a court be able to decide, for instance, that Microsoft can't ship Internet Explorer in Windows? If they do, should it be legal for RedHat to include Mozilla and Lynx?
Do we want a court deciding that? Or does it make more sense in a free society that individuals make those decisions, and that companies be free to enter into contracts.
I'm not talking about click-through UCITA crap here, I'm talking about two marketting and legal teams sitting down and deciding on a contract. The fact that it's hard to compete for specific markets if you don't sign that contract doesn't make someone a monopoly, it makes them successful.
And, it's not illegal to be a monopoly in the US; it's only illegal to be a monopoly *AND* use that power to prevent other options from existing. Since RedHat has revenues in the millions, and Sun has revenues in the billions, it's clear that Microsoft doesn't even have a monopoly, just a very, very successful business built on a foundation of weak software, strong marketting, and duplicity. That's not illegal, nor should it be.
You can't legislate against offering people bad choices just because some people are stupid enough to take them.
The ONLY action the government should take against Microsoft's supposed monopoly is to stop buying their products. If the US government was constrained to use free software wherever possible, it would not only force changes at Microsoft, but it would spur free software development *AND* save the taxpayers money, both in the form of less taxes spent on computer software, *AND* lower costs of goods and services as businesses would see better free software choices themselves.
Documents would eventually have to be interchanged in an open format, so that businesses using Windows could transfer them to and from government entities, and that would force Microsoft to either document what they've got, or use something documented. If Microsoft could write a word processor around those formats that people still wanted to pay for, more power to 'em.
I suspect a fair number of people never try Linux or one of the BSDs because they're moderately happy with AOL as an ISP, and switching OSes would mean switching ISPs at the same time.
You show me five people who say the only thing stopping them from using Linux is AOL, and I'll show you three people who are lying and two who are probably trying it anyway.
Forlorn hope that the questions will start making sense?
I still don't think those hundreds of folks will agree with your statement that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly.
So what? The mob's opinion is always right?
The majority of people in the world don't live as long as Americans, it doesn't mean I'm gonna give up medicine.
At one time, most people in the world (and it's possible this could still be the case) thought the Earth was flat; they weren't right.
99% of the population of the world hasn't thought three seconds about whether or not Microsoft is a monopoly. They only know what the press tells them, so it became a monopoly in their eyes the minute the press said so.
Meanwhile, the majority of the computer code in the world continues to be written for non-Microsoft operating systems, and I continue to get real work done on a daily basis without Windows, and Microsoft's pricing practices don't bother me one whit. I hope they double the damn price, it'll drive more business to me.
Wonder what they'd use as their carefully-crafted excuse to get around the ECPA if he'd had broadband?
If Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, I encourage you to make a living of a random piece of closed-source software for a non-Microsoft OS.
I don't write code. I get payed handsomely to administrate non-Microsoft OSes, actually.
The hundreds of folks getting paid to write our closed-source programs for those non-Microsoft OS need me.
Why not tackle the problem itself? Microsoft is bundling its software to force competition out of the market. Why not force Microsoft to leave IE, Media Player, video editing software, hell even Minesweeper out of the default Windows package? (How much cheaper would it become?:)
Why not just don't choose to purchase Windows yourself? Are you really forced to buy it?
You may be forced to USE it, but the same would be true if your office selected Linux, or Mac, or CP/M.
Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, because you don't *HAVE* to buy their product. This isn't like Standard Oil, where you needed to heat your house to live through the winter.
Hey, Taco;
How many Perl bots do you estimate auto-submit this to you the instant files appear in the FTP site?
If anyone has a link to this NASA draft document the article talks about, please post it below.
It probably requires a paid subscription to view.
The problem with StarOffice is that it hasn't completely worked to import/export word/excel documents. Until that day people will never truly be able to switch to it. I would LOVE the company I work for to switch to this software. But until it's completely MSOffice complient nobody can use it.
Yeah, I remember when people said that about Word not replacing Word Perfect.
How hard is it REALLY to parse out Word Documents and have it work????
Hard enough that even Microsoft doesn't always get it right.
Nowhere in the article does it mention creating mini-black-holes. The purpose is to try to create Higgs bosons and to precisely measure their characteristics to get a better handle on how electroweak symmetry breaking works.
Oh, sure, and then the whole world gets shrunk down to the size of a pea, and Stanley never gets to finish having sex with Bunny.
why was X dying? I've never had X die except in the rarest occasions or more routinely on systems I had really futzed with.
I have one system (I'm typing on it now) where X dies about once every three days. No error messages, no core dump, nothing to help me trace why at all. It just goes away.
That's Red Hat 7.1 with all the latest patches, and a Matrox Millennium II AGP board, which isn't exactly weird.
No offence to the US people, but your congressmen are stupid.
Whereas Slovenia is known for being a bastion of common-sense government?
You guys have been a democracy for what, a decade? Don't start throwing around political advice 'til you reach, say, 1/3rd our per-capita GDP and no more than 1.5x our unemployment rate, OK?
You're doing kick-ass on life expectancy and literacy rate, but you're still wet behind the ears, and you've only been off the foreign aid teat for like 8 years. Your inflation is bad, and if that keeps up your foreign debt ratio is not gonna be pretty.
You're probably over the "get stepped on by our neighbors" hump, but you've got a long way to go before you can think about taking business away from us.
Answer; it doesn't.
The fingerprint idea will basically keep folks entertained at your next 2600 meeting, but it won't keep anybody out of your data other than casual intruders, who would have been just as easily kept out by a BIOS password. This product is snake-oil.
Using what encryption key? Your fingerprint?
Obviously not. More likely, a key generated at some point in the setup process, and your fingerprint is merely the passphrase to access the key. Same way PGP does it, really.