So Canonical is completely in the black now? Otherwise your blithering is completely pointless. Shuttleworth has sold out without really actually gaining anything.
Meanwhile, all of the real work is still being done by someone else and whatever money Canonical happens to be making isn't contributing to the overall bottom line.
That ignores the fact that RMS produced his license as a practical matter to quiet the cries of his contributors. Detractors like to paint RMS as some sort of communist/anarchist crusader but his license was really about preventing abuse and keeping order.
The CC licenses are just an extension of that.
Not everyone will play nice and you need a mechanism to deal with those people.
...except that upstart doesn't meet that description.
It's more complex, therefore more subtle, therefore less repeatable and more difficult to debug. If I had a large number of machines of ANY sort, upstart is the LAST thing I would want to have to deal with.
Upstart is barely tolerable for desktop purposes.
You throw around "million" like its going to impress anyone. Many of the people around here already manage a volume of machines large enough to boggle the average human numeracy.
It's far too easy to shoot yourself in the foot with upstart. It is much more complicated. In it's efforts to solve a non-problem (namely making a machine boot faster) it tries to do things in parallel and creates a web of dependencies that can render your system unbootable.
It adds extra complexity for dubious gain.
It's the perfect example of why we shouldn't necessarily accept the advice of "helpful types" that think that things should be done the way that Microsoft does it or the way Apple does it.
There is nothing complicated about knowing what the available options are and matching them to an individual. There's nothing complicated about computing a person's subsidy eligibility.
If Kentucky can manage this kind of thing, then anyone can.
This system doesn't have to manage the ENTIRE health insurance industry. It only has to manage a very small part of it and most of that isn't even visible to the end user.
This is a function of the problems of doing anything with or for the federal government. The fact that a large state like California could pull off a similar system successfully demonstrates this to be true. The problem is the federal beaurocracy.
Now the question of why Apollo was successful when a seemingly simple website is not likely boils down to time. The federal government has had a long time to get worse in the 40 or so years between Apollo and today. Plus Apollo had a longer timeline.
...and part of that relates to how large your corporation is. If you have more money, you can use that money in order to be a bully. It's the capital in capitalism.
The fact that Amazon has "earned" this position doesn't alter the fact that they could be abusing it and harming the overall market.
As a corporation, they are by definition trying to destroy the market. That's what corporations do. That's why capitalism can't be left completely alone. It will implode otherwise. Both it's fans and it's detractors acknowledge this.
> I can't taste the difference between wal-mart tomatoes and whole foods tomatoes
I have a greatly diminished sense of smell and I can still taste differences between different varieties of tomato at a CHEAP grocery store, never mind whole foods.
You're basically trying to say that different species of plant can't be different. That's absurd of course.
Then again, there's no helping a McTomato regardless of where you acquired it.
The problem with Walmart is that they really do know their customer. They spend a lot of effort and technology in understanding what sells at each of their stores. If you are shopping at a Walmart frequented by trailer trash, you are going to only be presented with trailer trash options. Plus their whole reason for being is cheapness, not being good.
An organization has no moral or legal accountability. Therefore it should have no rights either. It should be treated the same way a child might be for similar reasons.
You don't have to use an organization as a surrogate for your speech. You are always free to speak your mind without it. Therefore you aren't losing anything if some limited liability entity has some limits place on it.
What matters if some Robber Baron can buy ad time to push his agenda. As long as he's still free to do that, there is no breach of free speech. He doesn't have to hid behind some astroturfing organization.
The law doesn't need to be corrupted to enable astroturfing.
In most places where gambling is legal in the US, it is only legal with severe (usually localized) restrictions and an extreme amount of government oversight.
I don't think Antigua ever offered to compete on a genuinely level playing field with anyone. So trying to throw that idea out is pretty assinine.
It just demonstrates how clueless most of the anti-USA blogosphere is when it comes to this particular subject.
There's a lot of history between us and Plato. Their fads don't necessarily have any relationship to our fads.
The idea of vegetarianism as some sort of moral crusade probably at the very least requires a society rich enough to support such a vanity. For everyone else, it's eat what you can get your hands on as you don't have the luxury of being picky.
The fact that Linux is gratis largely doesn't matter anyways. People get a "free" copy of Windows with their PCs and are loathe to upgrade. People hold onto ancient XP machines because they seem to work well enough and people are afraid of change.
Free upgrades might not even matter for Windows users. That fear of change and fear of tech in general will keep them away.
> If you really felt that way you wouldn't bother with this at thread at all.
That EXACTLY the reason why I would bother with this thread at all. This is just another example of the mindless hype that the media tries to artificially create. The media are acting like an unofficial divison of Apple Corp rather tha proper journalists.
The only positive value of Apple hardware is the fact that it is authorized to run MacOS. Beyond that, Apple hardware is inferior and more expensive. You get to spend more to get less.
I don't have to run "old" hardware with Linux. I can spend less, still get more box, and have cycles to spare for a VM or two.
If the freebie aspect of this current release of MacOS were actually relevant, I could run it on such a VM.
> Minimum upgrade point is Snow Leopard, which still only costs $30.
You're forgetting the $600 minimum buy in from whatever Mac hardware allows you to run this OS.
It's not free. It's bundled with expensive hardware.
Some fanboy was really scraping the bottom of the barrel with this particular bit of propaganda. It makes it sound like they've run out of anything meaningful to say. It smacks of desperation.
Slashdot Mirror
> Ubuntu does it with a minor
So Canonical is completely in the black now? Otherwise your blithering is completely pointless. Shuttleworth has sold out without really actually gaining anything.
Meanwhile, all of the real work is still being done by someone else and whatever money Canonical happens to be making isn't contributing to the overall bottom line.
That ignores the fact that RMS produced his license as a practical matter to quiet the cries of his contributors. Detractors like to paint RMS as some sort of communist/anarchist crusader but his license was really about preventing abuse and keeping order.
The CC licenses are just an extension of that.
Not everyone will play nice and you need a mechanism to deal with those people.
Anyone trying to tell you that Upstart is easier is simply lying to you.
Upstart is more complex by design.
...except that upstart doesn't meet that description.
It's more complex, therefore more subtle, therefore less repeatable and more difficult to debug. If I had a large number of machines of ANY sort, upstart is the LAST thing I would want to have to deal with.
Upstart is barely tolerable for desktop purposes.
You throw around "million" like its going to impress anyone. Many of the people around here already manage a volume of machines large enough to boggle the average human numeracy.
It's far too easy to shoot yourself in the foot with upstart. It is much more complicated. In it's efforts to solve a non-problem (namely making a machine boot faster) it tries to do things in parallel and creates a web of dependencies that can render your system unbootable.
It adds extra complexity for dubious gain.
It's the perfect example of why we shouldn't necessarily accept the advice of "helpful types" that think that things should be done the way that Microsoft does it or the way Apple does it.
There is nothing complicated about knowing what the available options are and matching them to an individual. There's nothing complicated about computing a person's subsidy eligibility.
If Kentucky can manage this kind of thing, then anyone can.
This system doesn't have to manage the ENTIRE health insurance industry. It only has to manage a very small part of it and most of that isn't even visible to the end user.
This is a function of the problems of doing anything with or for the federal government. The fact that a large state like California could pull off a similar system successfully demonstrates this to be true. The problem is the federal beaurocracy.
Now the question of why Apollo was successful when a seemingly simple website is not likely boils down to time. The federal government has had a long time to get worse in the 40 or so years between Apollo and today. Plus Apollo had a longer timeline.
...and part of that relates to how large your corporation is. If you have more money, you can use that money in order to be a bully. It's the capital in capitalism.
The fact that Amazon has "earned" this position doesn't alter the fact that they could be abusing it and harming the overall market.
As a corporation, they are by definition trying to destroy the market. That's what corporations do. That's why capitalism can't be left completely alone. It will implode otherwise. Both it's fans and it's detractors acknowledge this.
> I can't taste the difference between wal-mart tomatoes and whole foods tomatoes
I have a greatly diminished sense of smell and I can still taste differences between different varieties of tomato at a CHEAP grocery store, never mind whole foods.
You're basically trying to say that different species of plant can't be different. That's absurd of course.
Then again, there's no helping a McTomato regardless of where you acquired it.
The problem with Walmart is that they really do know their customer. They spend a lot of effort and technology in understanding what sells at each of their stores. If you are shopping at a Walmart frequented by trailer trash, you are going to only be presented with trailer trash options. Plus their whole reason for being is cheapness, not being good.
An organization has no moral or legal accountability. Therefore it should have no rights either. It should be treated the same way a child might be for similar reasons.
You don't have to use an organization as a surrogate for your speech. You are always free to speak your mind without it. Therefore you aren't losing anything if some limited liability entity has some limits place on it.
What matters if some Robber Baron can buy ad time to push his agenda. As long as he's still free to do that, there is no breach of free speech. He doesn't have to hid behind some astroturfing organization.
The law doesn't need to be corrupted to enable astroturfing.
In most places where gambling is legal in the US, it is only legal with severe (usually localized) restrictions and an extreme amount of government oversight.
I don't think Antigua ever offered to compete on a genuinely level playing field with anyone. So trying to throw that idea out is pretty assinine.
It just demonstrates how clueless most of the anti-USA blogosphere is when it comes to this particular subject.
> The difficulty, of course, is that the US signed a treaty saying it would abide by this sort of ruling. So now what?
So what. This should be seen as an affront to national soverienty by pretty much every body rather than the anti-USA hate-gasm it's turned into.
If the shoe were on the other foot, everyone would be defending the country that dared to have it's own independent law.
Blatant hypocrisy all around.
Remember, this is the precedent you begged for.
There's a lot of history between us and Plato. Their fads don't necessarily have any relationship to our fads.
The idea of vegetarianism as some sort of moral crusade probably at the very least requires a society rich enough to support such a vanity. For everyone else, it's eat what you can get your hands on as you don't have the luxury of being picky.
> life sentence means something between 10 and 30 years,
There is nothing "civilized" about this kind of doublespeak.
Nah, it's just something he remembered from some old computing magazine.
You said it. I would have to go way out of my way to spend $1500 on a new machine. That's true even for a laptop. Forget a desktop.
There's a reason that Apple has the lead in the over $1000 market. PCs haven't had to cost that much in a LONG time.
The fact that Linux is gratis largely doesn't matter anyways. People get a "free" copy of Windows with their PCs and are loathe to upgrade. People hold onto ancient XP machines because they seem to work well enough and people are afraid of change.
Free upgrades might not even matter for Windows users. That fear of change and fear of tech in general will keep them away.
> If you really felt that way you wouldn't bother with this at thread at all.
That EXACTLY the reason why I would bother with this thread at all. This is just another example of the mindless hype that the media tries to artificially create. The media are acting like an unofficial divison of Apple Corp rather tha proper journalists.
It's not "hatred", it's simple pragmatism.
The only positive value of Apple hardware is the fact that it is authorized to run MacOS. Beyond that, Apple hardware is inferior and more expensive. You get to spend more to get less.
I don't have to run "old" hardware with Linux. I can spend less, still get more box, and have cycles to spare for a VM or two.
If the freebie aspect of this current release of MacOS were actually relevant, I could run it on such a VM.
> Linux is just irrelevant to the desktop market.
So is MacOS really. This was true even when it was competing with MS-DOS of all things.
So any "helpful suggestions" will likely be total nonsense.
Computing history is littered with the corpses of companies that conformed to whatever "advice" you care to come up with.
No you can't. The hardware requirements of the newer versions of MacOS won't allow for it.
Every so often, those icky "specs" matter.
Plus you are contradicting that common bit of fanboy propaganda regarding "resale value".
The value of being able to avoid hardware with a fruity logo is far more interesting than using "older" hardware.
> Minimum upgrade point is Snow Leopard, which still only costs $30.
You're forgetting the $600 minimum buy in from whatever Mac hardware allows you to run this OS.
It's not free. It's bundled with expensive hardware.
Some fanboy was really scraping the bottom of the barrel with this particular bit of propaganda. It makes it sound like they've run out of anything meaningful to say. It smacks of desperation.
> I sit 6 feet away from an 80" projection screen. Tell me more about how going past 1080p has no value.
That makes you a freak. That doesn't prove that 1080p is generally useful.
This isn't about staring test patterns. This is about viewing motion picture content.