At least Buddhism teaches real things, real values and there's no imaginary persons, as Buddha himself has actually lived. And he said to think and evaluate things with your own brains, instead of following some stupid book.
Your pedestal opinion of Buddhism will change once you've been in a country with 90+% Buddhists for any length of time. They're no better then Christians, even with pushing their faith on others regardless of the intent of the religion.
I agree that it is a terrible for you and me however not for the general public. If you think about it from a typical users perspective where they don't interact much with the OS, all their programs are available at the bottom of the screen. That's very convenient for them compared to other DEs where applications are hidden within menus.
Most users simply want to use their programs for some simple basic computing and that's why OSX is in some ways a good UI for their target market. I don't think the same holds true for linux. We don't want to sacrifice ability for simplicity hence why the UIs are typically more complicated.
because humans lie, don't know they have it then spread it to others that don't know they have it. They rape women and infect them and babies are born with AIDs as well.
They abuse the patent system for financial gain. If you don't think blocking all sales of tablets of a competitor over rounded corners is abuse then we're just going to have to disagree. Competition form within the law isn't a problem, it's when they use the law as a weapon when things get messy.
If they were remaining true to their roots then Oblivion would have been in a jungle setting like it is in their past games and lore. What we got was some watered down mainstream console port which and that's not even going into the whole horse armor and door which went nowhere until you bought the DLC fiasco which really let down the fans.
Only if they don't license the name. On Notches blog he has mentioned many times about trying to negotiate with Bethesda. I don't think they were forced to go to court.
You're a assuming that Bethesda doesn't have a problem with Notch using Scrolls. This all only came up when they filed the paperwork for the trademark, not when using the name. They don't want others to own a trademark in video games similar to theirs and they're willing to fight it in court to get Notches trademark marked invalid.
They kind of lost their way in my opinion. They used to make huge games but as shown with Oblivion they took game content out to simply sell it as DLC.
I'll probably play it but not for a couple of years later when all the DLC that should have been in the game in the first place is included in their GOTY edition for a cheaper price (smart gamer I guess).
Uh what? So just because Bethesda happens to have a trademark on "the elder scrolls" they should be able to own every single word in their trade mark? Should they sue other companies for using the word "the" too? That sounds even worse!
Doesn't matter who came first in trademark law. You might not remember but the whole open source client GAIM (now called Pidgin) was out for years before AOL created AIM. AOL sued, GAIM lost it's name after 5 or 6 years of lawsuits.
This case however is slightly different because both parties have respected trademarks. What I don't understand is why government issue trademarks and let people fight it out in court. Buy trademarks aren't worth the paper they're printed on if you have to go to court all the time to defend them from other companies with similar trademarks.
I guess all these people stating that they'll boycott Bethesda should really be angry at Zenimax.
ZeniMax was founded by the founders of Bethesda for this very reason. Wikipedia has a nice write up on it..
ZeniMax Media was founded in 1999 by Bethesda Softworks founder Christopher Weaver and Robert A. Altman.
....
Weaver brought Altman on board as CEO, contributing his stock in Bethesda Softworks so that the new shell company, named ZeniMax Media, would be able to obtain funding.
Weather he knows it or not is irrelevant. He's doing more harm to the free software movement then good and shouldn't be in the position of leader of the FSF for the reasons already stated.
Not at all, my concerns are totally to do with how he holds back the FSF by being it's leader.
Where was he when campaigning on anything at all recently? Where was he through the whole GPL 3 process? What has he done to encourage more people to pick up free software recently? How many interviews has he turned down because he insists that the interviewer calls linux, "gnu/linux"? Don't mistake the successful actions of the GPL 1 and 2 from decade prior as the success of today.
You might not think this is important however he is the leader of the FSF, if he doesn't want to be successful at that anymore then he should step down so someone better fitted for the title can step up.
Free Software Foundation is as much a political group as anything, they need someone who can be rational and related to which can campaign on important issues. His PETA approach to software just discourages more people then it encourages. Instead of taking a positive approach to free software ideals they've gone on the offensive which we all know that it just results in everyone ignoring you. His child like behaviour, poor attire and refusal to join the internet of today is something which holds back the FSF in terms of encouraging free software ideals to a much wider audience.
- He doesn't use a web browser and has no knowledge of what the web is - He only hacks on Emacs because he uses it as his email client - He wasn't the least bit involved with the GPL 3 license which I would attribute most of the credit going to Eben Moglen - His black & white attitude to software - His unreasonable attitude which most of the time harms his cause more then helps - His bum like lifestyle which although in the 60s would have been commended now only detracts from his causes - The fact that he attempts to play "1984" games by rewriting history to make it look like he is the sole reason open/free software took off
These aren't a big deal when looked at by themselves (so please don't bother replying with a breakdown of my points) but when combined you begin to realise that this guy has no idea about the open source environment of today. How can he lead the FSF and encourage more free software advocates when the guy is so far removed?
It's time for him to step down and someone who understands the problems of today step up to lead the FSF. My vote is on Eben Moglen who has already proven himself as a respected member and is a great speaker.
Probably not a lot. When you live in high population poverty for a while you quickly learn that people's lives / wellbeing aren't as highly valued as they are in the west.
Slashdot Mirror
There are some many pro-microsoft, actual Microsoft staff and people that work with Microsoft on slashdot that your comment just looks idiotic.
Your pedestal opinion of Buddhism will change once you've been in a country with 90+% Buddhists for any length of time. They're no better then Christians, even with pushing their faith on others regardless of the intent of the religion.
In the same boat as you and it'll be a big letdown for me if it does have problems.
It's an ISO standard document format, so there will probably be a plugin for it at the least otherwise government wouldn't be able to use excel.
Open Office is coded in c++. Java isn't required. I don't use java with it.
What you have done is add your own definition on top of the story.
What you'd get is a DE with ugly icons and no polish.
I agree that it is a terrible for you and me however not for the general public. If you think about it from a typical users perspective where they don't interact much with the OS, all their programs are available at the bottom of the screen. That's very convenient for them compared to other DEs where applications are hidden within menus.
Most users simply want to use their programs for some simple basic computing and that's why OSX is in some ways a good UI for their target market. I don't think the same holds true for linux. We don't want to sacrifice ability for simplicity hence why the UIs are typically more complicated.
because humans lie, don't know they have it then spread it to others that don't know they have it. They rape women and infect them and babies are born with AIDs as well.
If that were true they wouldn't have felt the need to photoshop evidence which was on slashdot a while back.
oh... wrong thread..
They abuse the patent system for financial gain. If you don't think blocking all sales of tablets of a competitor over rounded corners is abuse then we're just going to have to disagree. Competition form within the law isn't a problem, it's when they use the law as a weapon when things get messy.
Their games have become more and more mainstream.
If they were remaining true to their roots then Oblivion would have been in a jungle setting like it is in their past games and lore. What we got was some watered down mainstream console port which and that's not even going into the whole horse armor and door which went nowhere until you bought the DLC fiasco which really let down the fans.
Only if they don't license the name. On Notches blog he has mentioned many times about trying to negotiate with Bethesda. I don't think they were forced to go to court.
If they were defending their trademark they'd have negotiated which Mojang have tried to do many times. I think its more then just that.
You're a assuming that Bethesda doesn't have a problem with Notch using Scrolls. This all only came up when they filed the paperwork for the trademark, not when using the name. They don't want others to own a trademark in video games similar to theirs and they're willing to fight it in court to get Notches trademark marked invalid.
They kind of lost their way in my opinion. They used to make huge games but as shown with Oblivion they took game content out to simply sell it as DLC.
I'll probably play it but not for a couple of years later when all the DLC that should have been in the game in the first place is included in their GOTY edition for a cheaper price (smart gamer I guess).
I think the court case is happening in Sweden rather then America just a FYI.
Uh what? So just because Bethesda happens to have a trademark on "the elder scrolls" they should be able to own every single word in their trade mark? Should they sue other companies for using the word "the" too? That sounds even worse!
Doesn't matter who came first in trademark law. You might not remember but the whole open source client GAIM (now called Pidgin) was out for years before AOL created AIM. AOL sued, GAIM lost it's name after 5 or 6 years of lawsuits.
This case however is slightly different because both parties have respected trademarks. What I don't understand is why government issue trademarks and let people fight it out in court. Buy trademarks aren't worth the paper they're printed on if you have to go to court all the time to defend them from other companies with similar trademarks.
ZeniMax was founded by the founders of Bethesda for this very reason. Wikipedia has a nice write up on it..
Weather he knows it or not is irrelevant. He's doing more harm to the free software movement then good and shouldn't be in the position of leader of the FSF for the reasons already stated.
Not at all, my concerns are totally to do with how he holds back the FSF by being it's leader.
Where was he when campaigning on anything at all recently? Where was he through the whole GPL 3 process? What has he done to encourage more people to pick up free software recently? How many interviews has he turned down because he insists that the interviewer calls linux, "gnu/linux"? Don't mistake the successful actions of the GPL 1 and 2 from decade prior as the success of today.
You might not think this is important however he is the leader of the FSF, if he doesn't want to be successful at that anymore then he should step down so someone better fitted for the title can step up.
Free Software Foundation is as much a political group as anything, they need someone who can be rational and related to which can campaign on important issues. His PETA approach to software just discourages more people then it encourages. Instead of taking a positive approach to free software ideals they've gone on the offensive which we all know that it just results in everyone ignoring you. His child like behaviour, poor attire and refusal to join the internet of today is something which holds back the FSF in terms of encouraging free software ideals to a much wider audience.
- He doesn't use a web browser and has no knowledge of what the web is
- He only hacks on Emacs because he uses it as his email client
- He wasn't the least bit involved with the GPL 3 license which I would attribute most of the credit going to Eben Moglen
- His black & white attitude to software
- His unreasonable attitude which most of the time harms his cause more then helps
- His bum like lifestyle which although in the 60s would have been commended now only detracts from his causes
- The fact that he attempts to play "1984" games by rewriting history to make it look like he is the sole reason open/free software took off
These aren't a big deal when looked at by themselves (so please don't bother replying with a breakdown of my points) but when combined you begin to realise that this guy has no idea about the open source environment of today. How can he lead the FSF and encourage more free software advocates when the guy is so far removed?
It's time for him to step down and someone who understands the problems of today step up to lead the FSF. My vote is on Eben Moglen who has already proven himself as a respected member and is a great speaker.
Probably not a lot. When you live in high population poverty for a while you quickly learn that people's lives / wellbeing aren't as highly valued as they are in the west.