Perhaps they feel the obligation to fight because nobody else is?
Actually, they are fighting because that is the target that MPAA (intelligently) choose to hit first. Either way, they didn't ask for this, but I'm glad they are standing up for themselves and (in turn) us as well.
Yes, I've done all that and more. Of course, I haven't pumped millions into any election funds, or promised to build a corporate presence in anyone's district, so chances are my voice isn't being heard over the sound the corporate voice.
The signal to noise ratio is already past critical mass. The noise (braindead or single issue people who vote strait party tickets) has completly drowned out the signal (people who actually research candidates and vote based on their records and past actions).
So, I still vote/voice concerns/etc, but how many times DO you kick at a mountain before you realise it's not going anywhere?
I guess the obvious conclusion is that people will not give away, only take from free sources. But then how do you explain napster? Even though I routinly hear that the quality of music is garbage ("it's all brittany spears and crap like that") I've found a wider range of music there than any other place I've ever been. From The Why Store to Bach and plenty of it.
I think it's a little early to declare gnutella in trouble, just wait till napster gets shut down, then watch the flood migrate over there.
This guy does sometimes impress me, and regardless of your personal feelings towards 2600, Emmanuel has done more than (I venture to assume) anyone else here to fight the good fight.
What still astounds me is the sheer ignorance and incompetance demonstrated by Kaplan. I wasn't expecting him to become an expert in the internet and related technologies over the course of this trial, but I was really hoping he would at least demonstrate basic reasoning skill and comprehension.
Appearently he was a little too "in the pockets" so to speak of his former employers (MPAA) to reason with the facts he was presented, and simply allowed his hostility towards 2600 to dictate his thinking.
My scary prediction of the future is that after HDTV gets off the ground and analog recording is replaced with tightly controlled digital recording, fair use will still probably be allowed, but technically impossible by the restriction placed on media and recording devices. Of course, the MPAA will blame "hackers" for taking away "joe average"'s ability to record stuff, claiming they had to to prevent the non-issue of piracy and probably point to this case as an example.
So when the public finally realizes what is happening with all this DMCA stuff, don't expect them to be outraged at the MPAA. I'm pretty sure the MPAA already has a PR game plan to blame us when the time comes.
That would be about the entire planet, except for the US and tinpot dictatorships. Gun ownership rates are close to zero in most countries, which is why people are bewildered by the US stance.
That is completly false. I suggest you study up on this a little more. England for example is having some pretty serious crime and gun problems. I suppose you have never heard of the Middle East, and Africa, where I suspect you will find a *few* guns around.
It's interesting to assume the rest of the world is all about love, peace, and harmony, and the US is the only violent holdout left. However, simply turning on CNN will disprove that.
Let's put things in prespective here. I'm running a 800MHz PIII with 128MB RAM. I'm not going to claim that I get serious preformance hits from running dual widget libraries, but I do notice things when I'm running Mozilla, VMWare, xmms, x3270, and about 10 e-term (don't ask) windows. I prefer to stick with either GTK or QT at the same time. I certainly don't HAVE to, but the old school, "grew up on a 8088" mentality in my still urges me to not lose cpu cycles and ram where I don't have to.
Since for the most part applications overlap between the two nicely, it's not that big a deal to keep the segregated.
It's not impossible. The shooter would have to have given you fair warning--one cannot, in most states at least, simply shoot someone in the back.
Actually, inside your house there is only one state that requires you retreat instead of fire. Not only do you not have to give a warning in your house, some of the most respected experts on guns and the law (Massad Ayob for one) recommends that you do NOT give a warning. Once inside your house, an intruder has legally demonstrated a threat, and warning him simply gives him a chance to spin around and fire.
Unlike the movies NOBODY on EARTH would actually freeze when told to, expecially while pumped up on adrenalen (sp?) and tense while robbing a house.
The most common response is to jump, turn and fire at whatever startled you. Sneak up behind someone who is trying to be sneaky sometime and yell freeze if you don't believe me:)
All that being said, you are right, it would go to trial and depend on a judge (or if you are really gutsy, a jury) interpreting your actions with regard to the law.
I agree with nearly everything you said, it's not just the guns, it's our whole culture that is pretty dangerous. I would love to live in a world without guns, but until I've got some evidence that all the "bad people" in the US have given up their's, I'm keeping mine.
Do you have any links to this? I'd be curious, since they fervently support the right to own machine guns and oppose any kind of real control, even to the mentally ill or felons.
Not really, but I'm a reluctant member and we occationally get info on the NRA's stance and what it's lobbying for.
Often what the NRA does is blown way out of proportion. I agree that they are a little extreem, but I belong to them because they are the only ones fighting the other extreem.
When they fought against the bill that would make "plastic guns" illegal, it was because there was no such thing as a plastic gun. The Glock 17 (the gun in question) is some 80% steel, with a little plastic, and completly detectable using conventional scanners. Ironically, it's also become a favorite gun on Law Enforcement. The myth of the plastic gun was a media invention.
While machine guns ARE legal for private citizens to own (yes, I'm serious, but you need to get a permit from the BATF that costs some $500 and takes years), the NRA (IIRC) has never lobbied to make it easier to get them.
The assult weapon ban is another non-issue that they fought. According to the governments stats, the 15 or so weapons they randomly classified as assult weapons were used in less than 2% of all crimes in the US. However, many of them were popular as competition target guns.
(in case you are interested, there is lost of stats and info here: http://www.wagc.com/curious/factoids.html Like everything with an agenda, take it with a grain of salt)
so much for guns ensuring liberty.:)
I'm confident that for every example you show me proving lax gun laws mean a higher crime rate, I can show you an example of the opposite.
New York, strict gun laws, yet guns everywhere.
Washington D.C, No guns allowed ANYWHERE in DC, so there are never any shootings there right?
Vermont, you don't even need a permit to carry a hangun in public, anyone can. Yet they are not known for their high schooting rate.
Look, I'm not going to get into a pissing match over this because neither of us can win. The amount of guns and gun laws in an area have not been proven to have ANY significant affect on the crime rate. There are so many variables and demographics that can be used to explain crime rates that it's an exercise in futility to attempt to explain it using just one.
Comparing the US to another country is also a bit silly, considering that our culture is completly different, we happen to have such a saturation of guns that the idea of collecting them all is laughable at best.
Yes we have a problem with crime, do you suggest that these criminals are such because they have easy access to guns? If you remove guns from all the criminals will they not just find other ways to kill, rape, etc? Perhaps there will be a huge interest pipe bombs and small biological weapons then?
I would love to live in a world where no guns exist, so when you have collected all the guns from criminals, then I'll turn in mine.
While he has some good points, it seems he is struggling to keep his rage in check while writing this:)
Personally, I like both and use GNOME at work, and KDE at home. I would have liked to have seen a little more positive supporting of KDE and showing off of KDE's strengths as evidence that they aren't worried instead of backhanded accusations of GNOME whoring itself out to the highest bidder. I kind of reminds me of whenever a punk band gets signed to a record lable, all the other punk bands jump over themselves attempting to cast them as "sellouts":)
The thing to remeber is that this is open source. SUN and HP do NOT control GNOME, the devlopers do, and if for some reason the devlopers give in to all that money and become corporate puppets and screw up GNOME, it simply forks and continues like nothing happend. We've seen this before people.
However, the point that throwing money and devlopers at a project does not mean it will suddenly improve is well taken, and nobody should assume the GNOME foundation will succede simply based of this this reasoning.
The statistic I keep hearing is that gun owners are 40+ times more likely to shoot yourself or a family member by accident than shoot an intruder.
Yes it's true.
When you consider suicides, and expand the defination of family member to include anyone living in your home, then expand home to include crack houses and criminal hidouts. This stat has been debunked so often that even the anti-self defence people seem to avoid it anymore.
That being said, I don't know anyone who doesn't feel guns should be restricted. The NRA supported plenty of gun bills in it's past, and I personally feel that a convicted felon or someone proven to be mentally unstable has no business having a gun. Using a gun to commit a crime should carry with it a VERY strong penalty.
From reading this thread, I get the impression that Americans can shoot anyone who breaks into their home, at least in some states. Is this correct? Last year, whilst lashed I walked into the wrong house. If this was in the USA, could I have been shot?
Possibly. If I was awakened in the middle of the night by some drunk person breaking into my house, after checking to make sure my family members were all accounted for and calling 911, I would certinly investigate with a loaded gun in hand. Some people would shoot first when seeing an intruder and they legally can do so (only inside their house, and not in Maryland, where they must retreat even inside their home).
I personally would confront the intruder and attempt to end the situation at all costs before pulling the trigger (unless I saw or had good reason to believe the intruder had a gun, then all bets are off). I would only do this because I feel confident in my ability to react quickly if the situation turned violent and because I have no desire to kill anyone. Anyone who looks forward to shooting a criminal who is breaking into their home has obviously never seen anyone die from gunshot wounds, and needs to grow up.
The simple fact is that criminals ARE out there, houses ARE broken into and people ARE killed or raped in their homes. The police are for the most part good, but they rarely stop crimes in progress, most often they arrive after the fact to clean up and attempt to find the criminal. Given this, I don't consider neglecting my and my family's safety to be an option, therefor I bought a gun and have taken several safety and proficency courses with it.
We have the right to bear arms but, we also have the obligation to be responsible.
As an American who owns guns for protection, I couldn't agree with you more. Unfortunatly, stories like this (which constitute a tiny percentage of cases where guns are used for protection) tend to make us all look bad. This leads to people (like many others in this thread) assuming that American gun owners are all crazy, rasist rednecks.
Guns are constantly used legaly for stopping crimes in progress and protecting innocent people, but those stories rarely make it out of the local paper. The ones that get all the national attention are when someone misuses a gun.
packing.org is an excellent resource for news stories about gun owners using their guns to protect themselves legally.
I don't think DFS is registering to high on the "alive" scale. I can only think of two companies that support it, and sometimes it feels like my shop is the only place on earth using it:)
you can't create laws that conflict with the constitutional dogma
I kinda prefer it that way. The constitution is pretty open and vague, allowing plenty of new laws to be passed (in fact, detailing HOW to pass them). What problem do you have with the Constitution?
Exactally. The only people posting here are people with too much free time at school or work (in my case I have an excuse, the next two weeks at work for me will be simply monitoring mainframe performance, I need something to combat the bordom:)
As a hardware manufacturer he really doesn't have to be. Be is simply using good business sense. What impresses me is that we have progressed to the point where good business sense dictates that Linux is a good risk for a large business like Dell to invest in.
Another thing to remember also is that slashdot is not THE linux community. It may have a A linux community inside it, but as a general rule, the most productive and talented linux hackers are not posting to every slashdot story.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps they feel the obligation to fight because nobody else is?
Actually, they are fighting because that is the target that MPAA (intelligently) choose to hit first. Either way, they didn't ask for this, but I'm glad they are standing up for themselves and (in turn) us as well.
Finkployd
Yes, I've done all that and more. Of course, I haven't pumped millions into any election funds, or promised to build a corporate presence in anyone's district, so chances are my voice isn't being heard over the sound the corporate voice.
The signal to noise ratio is already past critical mass. The noise (braindead or single issue people who vote strait party tickets) has completly drowned out the signal (people who actually research candidates and vote based on their records and past actions).
So, I still vote/voice concerns/etc, but how many times DO you kick at a mountain before you realise it's not going anywhere?
Finkployd
I guess the obvious conclusion is that people will not give away, only take from free sources. But then how do you explain napster? Even though I routinly hear that the quality of music is garbage ("it's all brittany spears and crap like that") I've found a wider range of music there than any other place I've ever been. From The Why Store to Bach and plenty of it.
I think it's a little early to declare gnutella in trouble, just wait till napster gets shut down, then watch the flood migrate over there.
Finkployd
This guy does sometimes impress me, and regardless of your personal feelings towards 2600, Emmanuel has done more than (I venture to assume) anyone else here to fight the good fight.
What still astounds me is the sheer ignorance and incompetance demonstrated by Kaplan. I wasn't expecting him to become an expert in the internet and related technologies over the course of this trial, but I was really hoping he would at least demonstrate basic reasoning skill and comprehension.
Appearently he was a little too "in the pockets" so to speak of his former employers (MPAA) to reason with the facts he was presented, and simply allowed his hostility towards 2600 to dictate his thinking.
My scary prediction of the future is that after HDTV gets off the ground and analog recording is replaced with tightly controlled digital recording, fair use will still probably be allowed, but technically impossible by the restriction placed on media and recording devices. Of course, the MPAA will blame "hackers" for taking away "joe average"'s ability to record stuff, claiming they had to to prevent the non-issue of piracy and probably point to this case as an example.
So when the public finally realizes what is happening with all this DMCA stuff, don't expect them to be outraged at the MPAA. I'm pretty sure the MPAA already has a PR game plan to blame us when the time comes.
Finkployd
I read the article, you comment is kinda pointless. I never said Linux wasn't wealthy, I said Bill Gates is the richest man on earth.
I really have no idea how you inferred that.
Finkployd
That would be about the entire planet, except for the US and tinpot dictatorships. Gun ownership rates are close to zero in most countries, which is why people are bewildered by the US stance.
That is completly false. I suggest you study up on this a little more. England for example is having some pretty serious crime and gun problems. I suppose you have never heard of the Middle East, and Africa, where I suspect you will find a *few* guns around.
It's interesting to assume the rest of the world is all about love, peace, and harmony, and the US is the only violent holdout left. However, simply turning on CNN will disprove that.
Finkployd
Let's put things in prespective here. I'm running a 800MHz PIII with 128MB RAM. I'm not going to claim that I get serious preformance hits from running dual widget libraries, but I do notice things when I'm running Mozilla, VMWare, xmms, x3270, and about 10 e-term (don't ask) windows. I prefer to stick with either GTK or QT at the same time. I certainly don't HAVE to, but the old school, "grew up on a 8088" mentality in my still urges me to not lose cpu cycles and ram where I don't have to.
Since for the most part applications overlap between the two nicely, it's not that big a deal to keep the segregated.
Finkployd
It's not impossible. The shooter would have to have given you fair warning--one cannot, in most states at least, simply shoot someone in the back.
:)
Actually, inside your house there is only one state that requires you retreat instead of fire. Not only do you not have to give a warning in your house, some of the most respected experts on guns and the law (Massad Ayob for one) recommends that you do NOT give a warning. Once inside your house, an intruder has legally demonstrated a threat, and warning him simply gives him a chance to spin around and fire.
Unlike the movies NOBODY on EARTH would actually freeze when told to, expecially while pumped up on adrenalen (sp?) and tense while robbing a house.
The most common response is to jump, turn and fire at whatever startled you. Sneak up behind someone who is trying to be sneaky sometime and yell freeze if you don't believe me
All that being said, you are right, it would go to trial and depend on a judge (or if you are really gutsy, a jury) interpreting your actions with regard to the law.
Finkployd
I agree with nearly everything you said, it's not just the guns, it's our whole culture that is pretty dangerous. I would love to live in a world without guns, but until I've got some evidence that all the "bad people" in the US have given up their's, I'm keeping mine.
Finkployd
Do you have any links to this? I'd be curious, since they fervently support the right to own machine guns and oppose any kind of real control, even to the mentally ill or felons.
:)
Not really, but I'm a reluctant member and we occationally get info on the NRA's stance and what it's lobbying for.
Often what the NRA does is blown way out of proportion. I agree that they are a little extreem, but I belong to them because they are the only ones fighting the other extreem.
When they fought against the bill that would make "plastic guns" illegal, it was because there was no such thing as a plastic gun. The Glock 17 (the gun in question) is some 80% steel, with a little plastic, and completly detectable using conventional scanners. Ironically, it's also become a favorite gun on Law Enforcement. The myth of the plastic gun was a media invention.
While machine guns ARE legal for private citizens to own (yes, I'm serious, but you need to get a permit from the BATF that costs some $500 and takes years), the NRA (IIRC) has never lobbied to make it easier to get them.
The assult weapon ban is another non-issue that they fought. According to the governments stats, the 15 or so weapons they randomly classified as assult weapons were used in less than 2% of all crimes in the US. However, many of them were popular as competition target guns.
(in case you are interested, there is lost of stats and info here: http://www.wagc.com/curious/factoids.html Like everything with an agenda, take it with a grain of salt)
so much for guns ensuring liberty.
I'm confident that for every example you show me proving lax gun laws mean a higher crime rate, I can show you an example of the opposite.
New York, strict gun laws, yet guns everywhere.
Washington D.C, No guns allowed ANYWHERE in DC, so there are never any shootings there right?
Vermont, you don't even need a permit to carry a hangun in public, anyone can. Yet they are not known for their high schooting rate.
Look, I'm not going to get into a pissing match over this because neither of us can win. The amount of guns and gun laws in an area have not been proven to have ANY significant affect on the crime rate. There are so many variables and demographics that can be used to explain crime rates that it's an exercise in futility to attempt to explain it using just one.
Comparing the US to another country is also a bit silly, considering that our culture is completly different, we happen to have such a saturation of guns that the idea of collecting them all is laughable at best.
Yes we have a problem with crime, do you suggest that these criminals are such because they have easy access to guns? If you remove guns from all the criminals will they not just find other ways to kill, rape, etc? Perhaps there will be a huge interest pipe bombs and small biological weapons then?
I would love to live in a world where no guns exist, so when you have collected all the guns from criminals, then I'll turn in mine.
Finkployd
You're right, so many girls value good looks and charm over being the FREAKING RICHEST MAN ON EARTH!!!!
:)
Finkployd
On your system, strain on your system.
Loading multiple widget libraries tends to take up ram
Finkployd
Oh come on moderators, that statement was intentionally stupid to respond to an equally stupid blanket statement :)
:)
I swear, conversational irony is completly lost on you guys
Finkployd
Yeah, but I try not to. It's a pretty big strain when you are using QT, GTK, kdelibs, and gnome-libs all at the same time.
I use both, but I use them on different computers.
Finkployd
While he has some good points, it seems he is struggling to keep his rage in check while writing this :)
:)
Personally, I like both and use GNOME at work, and KDE at home. I would have liked to have seen a little more positive supporting of KDE and showing off of KDE's strengths as evidence that they aren't worried instead of backhanded accusations of GNOME whoring itself out to the highest bidder. I kind of reminds me of whenever a punk band gets signed to a record lable, all the other punk bands jump over themselves attempting to cast them as "sellouts"
The thing to remeber is that this is open source. SUN and HP do NOT control GNOME, the devlopers do, and if for some reason the devlopers give in to all that money and become corporate puppets and screw up GNOME, it simply forks and continues like nothing happend. We've seen this before people.
However, the point that throwing money and devlopers at a project does not mean it will suddenly improve is well taken, and nobody should assume the GNOME foundation will succede simply based of this this reasoning.
Finkployd
The statistic I keep hearing is that gun owners are 40+ times more likely to shoot yourself or a family member by accident than shoot an intruder.
Yes it's true.
When you consider suicides, and expand the defination of family member to include anyone living in your home, then expand home to include crack houses and criminal hidouts. This stat has been debunked so often that even the anti-self defence people seem to avoid it anymore.
That being said, I don't know anyone who doesn't feel guns should be restricted. The NRA supported plenty of gun bills in it's past, and I personally feel that a convicted felon or someone proven to be mentally unstable has no business having a gun. Using a gun to commit a crime should carry with it a VERY strong penalty.
From reading this thread, I get the impression that Americans can shoot anyone who breaks into their home, at least in some states. Is this correct? Last year, whilst lashed I walked into the wrong house. If this was in the USA, could I have been shot?
Possibly. If I was awakened in the middle of the night by some drunk person breaking into my house, after checking to make sure my family members were all accounted for and calling 911, I would certinly investigate with a loaded gun in hand. Some people would shoot first when seeing an intruder and they legally can do so (only inside their house, and not in Maryland, where they must retreat even inside their home).
I personally would confront the intruder and attempt to end the situation at all costs before pulling the trigger (unless I saw or had good reason to believe the intruder had a gun, then all bets are off). I would only do this because I feel confident in my ability to react quickly if the situation turned violent and because I have no desire to kill anyone. Anyone who looks forward to shooting a criminal who is breaking into their home has obviously never seen anyone die from gunshot wounds, and needs to grow up.
The simple fact is that criminals ARE out there, houses ARE broken into and people ARE killed or raped in their homes. The police are for the most part good, but they rarely stop crimes in progress, most often they arrive after the fact to clean up and attempt to find the criminal. Given this, I don't consider neglecting my and my family's safety to be an option, therefor I bought a gun and have taken several safety and proficency courses with it.
Finkployd
We have the right to bear arms but, we also have the obligation to be responsible.
As an American who owns guns for protection, I couldn't agree with you more. Unfortunatly, stories like this (which constitute a tiny percentage of cases where guns are used for protection) tend to make us all look bad. This leads to people (like many others in this thread) assuming that American gun owners are all crazy, rasist rednecks.
Guns are constantly used legaly for stopping crimes in progress and protecting innocent people, but those stories rarely make it out of the local paper. The ones that get all the national attention are when someone misuses a gun.
packing.org is an excellent resource for news stories about gun owners using their guns to protect themselves legally.
Finkployd
See, everything is legal, you just have to keep jumping the border to get anything done :)
Finkployd
It's been outplaced by Coda and DFS.
:)
I don't think DFS is registering to high on the "alive" scale. I can only think of two companies that support it, and sometimes it feels like my shop is the only place on earth using it
Finkployd
As an American I'm outraged at what you just said. I'm even more outraged that you are right.
Maybe you should go back to mother england and hope things are better there.
They aren't, I refer you to the recent RIP legislation as evidence of this. At least I can still encrypt things.
Finkployd
you can't create laws that conflict with the constitutional dogma
I kinda prefer it that way. The constitution is pretty open and vague, allowing plenty of new laws to be passed (in fact, detailing HOW to pass them). What problem do you have with the Constitution?
Finkployd
That could only happen if you are running as root. you aren't running as root are you?
:)
Finkployd
Exactally. The only people posting here are people with too much free time at school or work (in my case I have an excuse, the next two weeks at work for me will be simply monitoring mainframe performance, I need something to combat the bordom :)
Finkployd
As a hardware manufacturer he really doesn't have to be. Be is simply using good business sense. What impresses me is that we have progressed to the point where good business sense dictates that Linux is a good risk for a large business like Dell to invest in.
Finkployd
Another thing to remember also is that slashdot is not THE linux community. It may have a A linux community inside it, but as a general rule, the most productive and talented linux hackers are not posting to every slashdot story.
Finkployd