I've been around long enough to remember the Slashdot memes of Natalie Portman (naked and petrified), Oog the Open-Source Caveman, and hot grits down your pants.
This apk thing seems to have come out of nowhere. It has a vague sense of being modeled after the TimeCube arguments, but could just be the Crazy talking. I don't know if it's just crazy, or Crazy Awesome.
Given the behavior assigned to God in the Old Testament and the overlap of omnipotence and omniscience, I suspect the explanation is a lack of omnibenevolence. (Were I omniscient, I would know how to make myself omnipotent. Were I omnipotent, I could simply will myself to be omniscient. Neither of those prescribe morality, however.)
I believe that it's even canon in the Old Testament that God is not omnibenevolent. He is benevolent... to a degree, but not an infinite degree like omniscience and omnipotence is supposed to be. He's described as a jealous god on more than one occasion, a human emotion that we often consider to be a flaw. The Flood is another occasion where he's clearly not omnibenevolent, enough that he makes a new covenant afterwards to never do that sort of thing again.
Really, the Old Testament God has many of the features of an abusive spouse who loves you so very much but sometimes has to beat you for your own good.
we heard the media talking about it yes, and the media has been covering for the administration on the issue. notice how no one there has been brought in to be spoken to?
It's almost like Libya was another country that we don't have any way of policing!
It's not quite Iran 1979, but I'd consider it still to be 'hostile territory.'
are you seriously comparing targeting civilians to military drone attacks?
They can be the same. It's the entire crux of the argument against drone strikes, in fact, and is the reason why folks in other countries (our "allies," no less) are so up in arms about it.
I have nothing to contribute, but if I had accounts with mod points right now I would dump as many +1, Funny mods into the parent's post for using the word "twatwaffles."
You really think anything is "won fair and square in war" --- that "I've got bigger weapons and am better at killing your folks than you are mine" justifies "therefore, all your stuff belongs to us"?
Not saying it's the best way, but isn't that how country lines have been drawn since the beginning of recorded history?
That is not the definition of parasite, however. A parasite exists to the detriment of its host. If both benefit, then that is symbiosis or mutualism. If the host is unharmed or unaffected, then this is not parasitism, it is commensalism. You can try to make the argument that incorporating BSD code into a closed-source project is parasitism, but I think that would be a fairly weak argument. Now if a company took BSD code, incorporated it into their project, then sued the maintainers of the BSD code or asserted their own copyright claim over it, that would be clear parasitism.
"Multimedia" may work fine under Linux, but the no-longer-maintained Adobe Flash proprietary plugin definitely sucks. It is, IMO, one of the reasons why Flash as a content delivery platform needs to die. It was developed by a company who put a developer who was vocally and publicly anti-Linux in charge of their Linux plugin. Hooray.
Fainstein wants gun control. She wants video game control
She's also trying to protect her friends and biggest supporters, the southern California movie industry, deflecting blame from them and towards other targets.
In a way, I "feel your pain." I also live in a rather expensive area, and my salary, upon which I just get by supporting my household, would make me rich in Oklahoma. Then again, if I lived in OK, I wouldn't be earning anything like I am now.
I've just had to come to the conclusion that there are just some areas that are too expensive for non-wealthy, non-high-income people to live. New York is one, California coastal hotspots are another. There are just too many people who want to live there, and prices are sky-high as a result. You're pretty much treading water right now, and as much as it sucks to say it, if I were in that situation I'd start seeing if there were job opportunities in another state. Or at least further inland.
I must study politics and war, that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy, natural history and naval architecture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, tapestry, and porcelain.
- John Adams
John Adams was also upper class. He could afford the luxury.
Here's what J K Rowling remembers from her time working towards her Bachelor's degree, according to the Wikipedia: "doing no work whatsoever"... "wore heavy eyeliner, listened to the Smiths, and read Dickens and Tolkien".
Given what she's famous for, it sounds like it might have actually prepared her for her career.
But university's not supposed to be about getting a job; it's supposed to be about higher learning
But 'real life' is about surviving, which means a good income stream, which means a reasonable job. University also seems to mean "take out $50k-100k in loans," which makes that getting a job part even more important.
The problem is out-of-control tuition rates. Back in the "old days", college still costed some money, but nothing like it does today
I think it's not only out of control tuition rates, but it's also the insistence on going to the "first choice" uber-expensive school if the financial aid package comes through. When I was picking colleges, of the ones I was accepted to, my first choice was the private university, the second choice being the state university. The financial aid program back then would have required us to pay $17k per year out of pocket (we were a somewhat poor family, so this wasn't an option). I was very disappointed to have to go to the state college instead, but ended up greatly enjoying my time there, and things couldn't have turned out better. The moral being... the world won't end if you 'have to' go to the cheaper-in-price-but-not-in-quality state college instead. If going to your first-choice college means getting $100k in debt.. then go to the cheaper college. Chances are that your future employers won't really care.
I would never have been able to get through the university program without the Stafford loans, and paid them off within three years of graduation, so I strongly believe in the student loan process. But I wasn't getting myself -$50k- or more into debt either. A balance has to be maintained, and right now the super-availability of loans is encouraging the higher tuition rates -- if no one could pay it, they couldn't charge as much. If they couldn't charge as much they would have to greatly cut back or put much more pressure on legislatures (in the case of state colleges).
The point is to reduce piracy. If that means fewer people overall play the game, fine.
What is the business rationale for that?
It's simply an acknowledgement that they are not going to be able to sell their product to 100% of the people in the country. They don't have a beef with people who aren't interested in the game and don't buy it. Would they like those people to buy the game? Sure. But they're not actively angry at those people like they are at the people who play the game but don't pay for it. To them, a large playerbase with little revenue is pointless.
I disagree. The backlash being created at this very moment is enough to convince management NOT to include it.
I'm not so sure about there. There are a LOT of people out there who think like my partner does. I've been trying to tell him of the importance of this, but he remains unconvinced, and he says "look, people are just going to get used to the idea that you might not be able to play a game on launch day. It'll be the new normal and people will be used to it." The SimCity debacle is a definite black eye, but most always-on DRM games are not handled that badly.
No one has ever demonstrated an increase in purchases because of DRM. If DRM actually converted pirates into paying customers, you'd have a fair argument there
Converting pirates into customers would be a nice side benefit, but it's not entirely the point. The point is to reduce piracy. If that means fewer people overall play the game, fine. People at game companies don't particularly care if people who don't pay for the game don't play the game. They'd really like more buyers, naturally, but the far far far bigger problem that causes them all sorts of angst is people playing the game without paying for it.
You ever thought of giving them , oh I dunno, a ball or a bike rather that sticking them in front of a monitor to vegitate? FFS , how do idiots like you ever figure out how to reproduce?
There are quite a few families who live in urban areas where giving your kid a bike is almost a death sentence.
How is it that you can have a legislative branch with a collective approval rating in the teens, and yet no one gets kicked out
Because a person living in California can't vote for a candidate in a Texas senate race as well. "Collectively" people hate Congress. But they like their representative and senator.
The approval rating of congress is a reflection that the United States is made up of many different clusters of people, each cluster has its own wants and needs, and doesn't think very highly of the other clusters' wants.
Because hosting servers and running the software ain't cheap.
Better description would be let players contact each other directly, IP-to-IP without needing a Sony/MS/etc middleman with their consoles.
That doesn't work well either. The "bad old days" of the late 90s and early 2000s, before the rise of the game servers, made bad assumptions about networks that weren't all THAT valid then and certainly aren't valid now. That is, that the two computers would be directly connected to the Internet without firewalls or IP masquerading. Various games tried to work around this without much success, and trying to host a game on an IP masqueraded connection with two people on the subnet, and a third connecting from another house... forget it. That was painful enough for someone used to setting up firewalls. Forget about your average gamer.
Nowadays home routers are semi-secure and they'll just drop all incoming traffic that is not part of an existing connection. You can't host a game because your router won't let connections through. Your average user won't even know how to connect to the router, much less what settings to change.
Remember, these have to be solutions that work for non-technical folks. Otherwise game companies won't bother. They -especially- won't bother if they make a profit on online server fees.
Even though we rarely agree i have to give you credit is that is a GREAT example of what happens when a company that doesn't make their living using the GPL model tries to buy a GPL company, it ends up in a mess.
It's probably the big reason why the FSF recommends not only releasing code as GPL, but then assigning ownership to the FSF. It sounds self-serving, but it ensures that an "owner" can not close or restrict the source afterwards.
Slashdot Mirror
Note that the holo program ends before Hawking can collect. Reportedly, he once greeted Brent Spiner at a convention by asking "Where's my money?"
I've been around long enough to remember the Slashdot memes of Natalie Portman (naked and petrified), Oog the Open-Source Caveman, and hot grits down your pants.
This apk thing seems to have come out of nowhere. It has a vague sense of being modeled after the TimeCube arguments, but could just be the Crazy talking.
I don't know if it's just crazy, or Crazy Awesome.
Given the behavior assigned to God in the Old Testament and the overlap of omnipotence and omniscience, I suspect the explanation is a lack of omnibenevolence. (Were I omniscient, I would know how to make myself omnipotent. Were I omnipotent, I could simply will myself to be omniscient. Neither of those prescribe morality, however.)
I believe that it's even canon in the Old Testament that God is not omnibenevolent. He is benevolent... to a degree, but not an infinite degree like omniscience and omnipotence is supposed to be. He's described as a jealous god on more than one occasion, a human emotion that we often consider to be a flaw. The Flood is another occasion where he's clearly not omnibenevolent, enough that he makes a new covenant afterwards to never do that sort of thing again.
Really, the Old Testament God has many of the features of an abusive spouse who loves you so very much but sometimes has to beat you for your own good.
He was injured in the blast, but is not currently a suspect and law enforcement officers say he is not in custody.
we heard the media talking about it yes, and the media has been covering for the administration on the issue. notice how no one there has been brought in to be spoken to?
It's almost like Libya was another country that we don't have any way of policing!
It's not quite Iran 1979, but I'd consider it still to be 'hostile territory.'
are you seriously comparing targeting civilians to military drone attacks?
They can be the same. It's the entire crux of the argument against drone strikes, in fact, and is the reason why folks in other countries (our "allies," no less) are so up in arms about it.
I have nothing to contribute, but if I had accounts with mod points right now I would dump as many +1, Funny mods into the parent's post for using the word "twatwaffles."
You really think anything is "won fair and square in war" --- that "I've got bigger weapons and am better at killing your folks than you are mine" justifies "therefore, all your stuff belongs to us"?
Not saying it's the best way, but isn't that how country lines have been drawn since the beginning of recorded history?
That is not the definition of parasite, however. A parasite exists to the detriment of its host. If both benefit, then that is symbiosis or mutualism. If the host is unharmed or unaffected, then this is not parasitism, it is commensalism. You can try to make the argument that incorporating BSD code into a closed-source project is parasitism, but I think that would be a fairly weak argument. Now if a company took BSD code, incorporated it into their project, then sued the maintainers of the BSD code or asserted their own copyright claim over it, that would be clear parasitism.
"Multimedia" may work fine under Linux, but the no-longer-maintained Adobe Flash proprietary plugin definitely sucks. It is, IMO, one of the reasons why Flash as a content delivery platform needs to die. It was developed by a company who put a developer who was vocally and publicly anti-Linux in charge of their Linux plugin. Hooray.
Fainstein wants gun control. She wants video game control
She's also trying to protect her friends and biggest supporters, the southern California movie industry, deflecting blame from them and towards other targets.
It is fairly insightful, yes.
In a way, I "feel your pain." I also live in a rather expensive area, and my salary, upon which I just get by supporting my household, would make me rich in Oklahoma. Then again, if I lived in OK, I wouldn't be earning anything like I am now.
I've just had to come to the conclusion that there are just some areas that are too expensive for non-wealthy, non-high-income people to live. New York is one, California coastal hotspots are another. There are just too many people who want to live there, and prices are sky-high as a result. You're pretty much treading water right now, and as much as it sucks to say it, if I were in that situation I'd start seeing if there were job opportunities in another state. Or at least further inland.
I must study politics and war, that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy, natural history and naval architecture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, tapestry, and porcelain.
- John Adams
John Adams was also upper class. He could afford the luxury.
Here's what J K Rowling remembers from her time working towards her Bachelor's degree, according to the Wikipedia: "doing no work whatsoever" ... "wore heavy eyeliner, listened to the Smiths, and read Dickens and Tolkien".
Given what she's famous for, it sounds like it might have actually prepared her for her career.
But university's not supposed to be about getting a job; it's supposed to be about higher learning
But 'real life' is about surviving, which means a good income stream, which means a reasonable job.
University also seems to mean "take out $50k-100k in loans," which makes that getting a job part even more important.
You have to love this attitude! Because I don't have something, take it away from someone else. The real race to the bottom.
Maybe it's more that the rest of us realize how bad of a system it actually is. I'm not envious of tenure at all.
The problem is out-of-control tuition rates. Back in the "old days", college still costed some money, but nothing like it does today
I think it's not only out of control tuition rates, but it's also the insistence on going to the "first choice" uber-expensive school if the financial aid package comes through. When I was picking colleges, of the ones I was accepted to, my first choice was the private university, the second choice being the state university. The financial aid program back then would have required us to pay $17k per year out of pocket (we were a somewhat poor family, so this wasn't an option). I was very disappointed to have to go to the state college instead, but ended up greatly enjoying my time there, and things couldn't have turned out better. The moral being... the world won't end if you 'have to' go to the cheaper-in-price-but-not-in-quality state college instead. If going to your first-choice college means getting $100k in debt.. then go to the cheaper college. Chances are that your future employers won't really care.
I would never have been able to get through the university program without the Stafford loans, and paid them off within three years of graduation, so I strongly believe in the student loan process. But I wasn't getting myself -$50k- or more into debt either. A balance has to be maintained, and right now the super-availability of loans is encouraging the higher tuition rates -- if no one could pay it, they couldn't charge as much. If they couldn't charge as much they would have to greatly cut back or put much more pressure on legislatures (in the case of state colleges).
The point is to reduce piracy. If that means fewer people overall play the game, fine.
What is the business rationale for that?
It's simply an acknowledgement that they are not going to be able to sell their product to 100% of the people in the country. They don't have a beef with people who aren't interested in the game and don't buy it. Would they like those people to buy the game? Sure. But they're not actively angry at those people like they are at the people who play the game but don't pay for it. To them, a large playerbase with little revenue is pointless.
I disagree. The backlash being created at this very moment is enough to convince management NOT to include it.
I'm not so sure about there. There are a LOT of people out there who think like my partner does. I've been trying to tell him of the importance of this, but he remains unconvinced, and he says "look, people are just going to get used to the idea that you might not be able to play a game on launch day. It'll be the new normal and people will be used to it." The SimCity debacle is a definite black eye, but most always-on DRM games are not handled that badly.
No one has ever demonstrated an increase in purchases because of DRM. If DRM actually converted pirates into paying customers, you'd have a fair argument there
Converting pirates into customers would be a nice side benefit, but it's not entirely the point. The point is to reduce piracy. If that means fewer people overall play the game, fine. People at game companies don't particularly care if people who don't pay for the game don't play the game. They'd really like more buyers, naturally, but the far far far bigger problem that causes them all sorts of angst is people playing the game without paying for it.
You ever thought of giving them , oh I dunno, a ball or a bike rather that sticking them in front of a monitor to vegitate? FFS , how do idiots like you ever figure out how to reproduce?
There are quite a few families who live in urban areas where giving your kid a bike is almost a death sentence.
How is it that you can have a legislative branch with a collective approval rating in the teens, and yet no one gets kicked out
Because a person living in California can't vote for a candidate in a Texas senate race as well.
"Collectively" people hate Congress. But they like their representative and senator.
The approval rating of congress is a reflection that the United States is made up of many different clusters of people, each cluster has its own wants and needs, and doesn't think very highly of the other clusters' wants.
Because hosting servers and running the software ain't cheap.
Better description would be let players contact each other directly, IP-to-IP without needing a Sony/MS/etc middleman with their consoles.
That doesn't work well either. The "bad old days" of the late 90s and early 2000s, before the rise of the game servers, made bad assumptions about networks that weren't all THAT valid then and certainly aren't valid now. That is, that the two computers would be directly connected to the Internet without firewalls or IP masquerading. Various games tried to work around this without much success, and trying to host a game on an IP masqueraded connection with two people on the subnet, and a third connecting from another house... forget it. That was painful enough for someone used to setting up firewalls. Forget about your average gamer.
Nowadays home routers are semi-secure and they'll just drop all incoming traffic that is not part of an existing connection. You can't host a game because your router won't let connections through. Your average user won't even know how to connect to the router, much less what settings to change.
Remember, these have to be solutions that work for non-technical folks. Otherwise game companies won't bother. They -especially- won't bother if they make a profit on online server fees.
Even though we rarely agree i have to give you credit is that is a GREAT example of what happens when a company that doesn't make their living using the GPL model tries to buy a GPL company, it ends up in a mess.
It's probably the big reason why the FSF recommends not only releasing code as GPL, but then assigning ownership to the FSF. It sounds self-serving, but it ensures that an "owner" can not close or restrict the source afterwards.