1. Linux (in broad sense) people don't go round preaching "Linux is the innovative system, everything is fresh". It is more about stability, liberty, community, improvement and whatnot. Microsoft, however, says it is innovate company, and that is absurd. We don't have to be innovative to see that others are not innovative.
2. I believe packaging systems (like apt) are innovative themselves. In marketing it would sound like "imagine vast amount of software available at your fingertips. Just write the name of software or just what you want it to do, hit return and you can use it in less that 2 minutes"
But it seems lot of them are having deadlines. Kernel every 3 months, GNOME - 6 months, OO.o - 3 months. Not sure about others. Syncing at least these deadlines could help.
It seems that man is a rational animal, and social one too. If no one else has seen seen it and there is no rational explanation, then it did not happen. But then I guess it doesn't matter, because man is practical as well - why believe something (even your own eyes), if that doesn't change anything. In lessons about cognition I heard that objective information is something, that is shareable with others (what others can experience), subjective can only be personal experience. Given your vision of UFO and lack of objectivity (only you saw it) and lack of reasoning (evidence), you discard it as false, even though it can be true.
If I remember correctly, they swapped linux kernel with sun kernel and added some tools. Since debian (foundation of Ubuntu) is kernel agnostic (but linux is the working kernel), SUN just ported Ubuntu to solaris. More on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexenta_OS
Alienate? How does using different technology alienates? Even using incompatible technology doesn't alienate, although it is not very efficient (and this is not the case).
Trust science? Are you mad?!? If Einstein trusted Newton on time and space, where would we be? Distrust is important. Ok, ok, by science you mean scientific method or hypotheses or what? And trust in mathematics is questionable as well - even if in theorems there are no errors, one must always make sure that axioms are appropriate. P.S. It is sometimes hard to remember that mathematics has nothing to do with reality, it should come with "COMES "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."
>They can produce good research and put forward a good testable hypothesis that can better explain the world or the liars for Jesus can just STFU.
I hope you understand that science has nothing to do with truth. It is about predictions (thus usability). If a theory (in loose sense) doesn't predict anything, pragmatic scientist would go 'so what? It is of no use to me.'
What you are saying is that if something cannot be tested, than it is false. That is stupid. Take GÃdel's Incompleteness theorem. Form an abstract:
The implication is that all logical system of any complexity are, by definition, incomplete; each of them contains, at any given time, more true statements than it can possibly prove according to its own defining set of rules.
Even in world that we define ourselves, there are true things we cannot prove. I will make bold and intuitive guess that it is so for real world.
Geeks don't watch ads, that is why we live in basement, pirate movies, use ad-block etc.
But outside of trenches there is almost nothing we can do to prevent ads from getting to us.
Don't confuse action experience (algebra) and witnessing experience (tits observation), the former requires skills, the latter - umm... em... guts? I can not imagine why tits should have devastating effect upon children (especially girls). I believe it is because it is hidden and when is finally observed, the wow effect kicks in.
> They don't experience the world the same way. Is this your justification for restriction? Why shouldn't we let them experience world in their own way? I can understand you if you consider your children to be you, only younger, but if it is not so, you should come up with better justification.
--Boring part Letting children experience world as they wish gives the ability to adapt to the current situation. If belief "man can do to world what it wants and nothing can go wrong" is passed down from generation to generation and it is made sure that further generations will see world the same, we might end up crap creek. Sure, there are risks, but this belief "it is right because I believe so" is silly.
Also, humans (especially children) are quite adaptive and can take for normal things that might seem very bizarre. What is right and wrong is learnt in early childhood, and if you give a message "X is bad" and then try to give message "X is good", confusion can be quite serious, for one cannot discard early upbringing as easily as latest IBM FUD (or is it MS now...).
More on tits, [sarcasm] kids in Africa must be really be retards. All the psychological damage that comes from observing tits (about 200 of them, daily) must be devastating![end sarcasm]
You know, it's like if I came to you daily to tell you about how great I am at CounterStrike. (I actually had the mis-fortune of working with someone like that.)
Not everyone is a competitor. There may be some companies that are your allies. If you have energy saving software and your distributor uses it, this makes your paper cheaper. It also makes other company paper cheaper as well, however, more costumers now can afford it (or afford it more).
Also, if over all economy improves, the chances are your paper business will improve. Your supplyers can deliver more cheaply, your clients can pay more.
And to finish, if you release reasonably good and useful code, other altruistic companies may contribute back, thus reducing time and effort.
Taking the definition from the wikipedia: >A natural right is one that is claimed to exist even when it is not enforced by the government or society as a whole[..] Taking this definition, copyright is unnatural. Not only it has to be enforced by law, but this law is constantly broken. Not only it is not natural, it doesn't seem natural.
>Constitution is natural, since people are natural With this statement you render term 'natural' useless. Can you name at least one thing, that is not natural by your definition?
Slashdot Mirror
1. Linux (in broad sense) people don't go round preaching "Linux is the innovative system, everything is fresh". It is more about stability, liberty, community, improvement and whatnot.
Microsoft, however, says it is innovate company, and that is absurd. We don't have to be innovative to see that others are not innovative.
2. I believe packaging systems (like apt) are innovative themselves. In marketing it would sound like "imagine vast amount of software available at your fingertips. Just write the name of software or just what you want it to do, hit return and you can use it in less that 2 minutes"
Do RMS speeches stay free (libre)? If no, then he contradicts his ideals, if speeches are available and without restrictions, everything is ok.
But it seems lot of them are having deadlines. Kernel every 3 months, GNOME - 6 months, OO.o - 3 months. Not sure about others.
Syncing at least these deadlines could help.
It seems that man is a rational animal, and social one too.
If no one else has seen seen it and there is no rational explanation, then it did not happen. But then I guess it doesn't matter, because man is practical as well - why believe something (even your own eyes), if that doesn't change anything.
In lessons about cognition I heard that objective information is something, that is shareable with others (what others can experience), subjective can only be personal experience. Given your vision of UFO and lack of objectivity (only you saw it) and lack of reasoning (evidence), you discard it as false, even though it can be true.
Aren't you, by any chance, running windows ;)
Well, the link has nothing to do MS, but I sure as hell would like it to be blocked.
If I remember correctly, they swapped linux kernel with sun kernel and added some tools. Since debian (foundation of Ubuntu) is kernel agnostic (but linux is the working kernel), SUN just ported Ubuntu to solaris.
More on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexenta_OS
Alienate? How does using different technology alienates? Even using incompatible technology doesn't alienate, although it is not very efficient (and this is not the case).
Translation:
Fluffeh: It might be bad.
CannonballHead: It might not be bad.
Apart from apparent lack of any information, I doubt incomplete fuzzy logic is necessary bad logic.
Trust science? Are you mad?!? If Einstein trusted Newton on time and space, where would we be? Distrust is important.
Ok, ok, by science you mean scientific method or hypotheses or what?
And trust in mathematics is questionable as well - even if in theorems there are no errors, one must always make sure that axioms are appropriate.
P.S. It is sometimes hard to remember that mathematics has nothing to do with reality, it should come with "COMES "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."
>They can produce good research and put forward a good testable hypothesis that can better explain the world or the liars for Jesus can just STFU.
I hope you understand that science has nothing to do with truth. It is about predictions (thus usability). If a theory (in loose sense) doesn't predict anything, pragmatic scientist would go 'so what? It is of no use to me.'
What you are saying is that if something cannot be tested, than it is false. That is stupid. Take GÃdel's Incompleteness theorem. Form an abstract:
The implication is that all logical system of any complexity are, by definition, incomplete; each of them contains, at any given time, more true statements than it can possibly prove according to its own defining set of rules.
Even in world that we define ourselves, there are true things we cannot prove. I will make bold and intuitive guess that it is so for real world.
Geeks don't watch ads, that is why we live in basement, pirate movies, use ad-block etc. But outside of trenches there is almost nothing we can do to prevent ads from getting to us.
Try something without life threats. Computer games and internet is not very widespread source of deaths.
A better analogy would be "Imagine letting your kids play in garden with other kids unattended" and even that wouldn't be very accurate
Note: when I was a kid, we were playing around unattended a lot, death rate - zero. Anecdotal evidence.
Don't confuse action experience (algebra) and witnessing experience (tits observation), the former requires skills, the latter - umm... em... guts?
I can not imagine why tits should have devastating effect upon children (especially girls). I believe it is because it is hidden and when is finally observed, the wow effect kicks in.
> They don't experience the world the same way.
Is this your justification for restriction? Why shouldn't we let them experience world in their own way? I can understand you if you consider your children to be you, only younger, but if it is not so, you should come up with better justification.
--Boring part
Letting children experience world as they wish gives the ability to adapt to the current situation. If belief "man can do to world what it wants and nothing can go wrong" is passed down from generation to generation and it is made sure that further generations will see world the same, we might end up crap creek.
Sure, there are risks, but this belief "it is right because I believe so" is silly.
Also, humans (especially children) are quite adaptive and can take for normal things that might seem very bizarre. What is right and wrong is learnt in early childhood, and if you give a message "X is bad" and then try to give message "X is good", confusion can be quite serious, for one cannot discard early upbringing as easily as latest IBM FUD (or is it MS now...).
More on tits, [sarcasm] kids in Africa must be really be retards. All the psychological damage that comes from observing tits (about 200 of them, daily) must be devastating![end sarcasm]
This is so sad it's funny.
Are you Ethan from here?
Strange, it works ok in Latvia. Maybe they hate British in life as much as in series?
Um, it is already there. Right now only release candidate.
Just be happy "bugs" are not features.
Though the tendency is worrying.
Not everyone is a competitor. There may be some companies that are your allies. If you have energy saving software and your distributor uses it, this makes your paper cheaper. It also makes other company paper cheaper as well, however, more costumers now can afford it (or afford it more).
Also, if over all economy improves, the chances are your paper business will improve. Your supplyers can deliver more cheaply, your clients can pay more.
And to finish, if you release reasonably good and useful code, other altruistic companies may contribute back, thus reducing time and effort.
Nothing much would happen. Wal-Mart would just sell something else :)
Taking the definition from the wikipedia:
>A natural right is one that is claimed to exist even when it is not enforced by the government or society as a whole[..]
Taking this definition, copyright is unnatural. Not only it has to be enforced by law, but this law is constantly broken. Not only it is not natural, it doesn't seem natural.
>Constitution is natural, since people are natural
With this statement you render term 'natural' useless. Can you name at least one thing, that is not natural by your definition?
When bored, hackers write viruses, scientists - papers.
Disclaimer, I am non of the above.
Oh please! 1) Constitutional is still not natural. 2) Parent is talking about origins of copyright, and mind you, that is not USA.
This should work in EU, there costumer deception is against the law :)