OK, so are we now on the record that *any* government meddling on what you can sell is bad? Wanna repeal antitrust now? I mean, what it all boils down to is that some people don't like the way other people are doing business, so they want the government to outlaw it. Congratulations my friend, now you know how Bill Gates feels, and why he was so "arrogant" when the government effectively criminalized his "'unapproved by the government' donations in kind".
Good point. This would definitely require some tweaking. For starters, we could try it just with corporations, not individuals, and see how it works. Lotsa luck singling out corps though...
When it comes to disposing of inventory, I guess the corps could be required to auction it in bulk lots. That way, inventory clearance can't be used to mask anti-competitive pricing practices.
I find it amusing that the home gardening crowed shows such a great interest in inexpensive "bedding plants" that are defended by nursery-supported patents and grown by "The Great Satans" of home lumberyards. It goes to show you how strong and creative this community is, and highlights upon some of the beneficial fundamental values that the gardening crowd holds: freedom of expression in horticulture. Sappy huh. =)
At the heart of the gardening debate (or very close to it), I think that Big Box Stores want to prevent propogation and resale of bedding plants because it reveals to customers the true identity of the plants: greenery that is being sold far too cheaply; an entry into the gardening market that would be completely unsustainable if Big Box Stores were not monopolies (I.E. able to sustain gross losses in many other markets in order to direct/force attention back to their housewares and appliances).
Get it? These kinds of business practices are not unique to Microsoft or computing, or to monopolies. The bit about bedding plants is real. I was reading about it in the Washington Post just the other day. Ever wonder how stores make money selling potted azaleas for $5? Answer: they don't. They're just hoping to pull you in so you'll buy a mower or something that really makes them money. Remember, from the POV of SCO, Linux looks like the same kind of unfair pricing that the XBox looks like to a lot of people on Slashdot, and in both cases people are willing to twist the law to "fix" the problem. The real problem? The real "heart of the debate"?
Business law.
A more broad, sweeping fix? Make it illegal for anyone to sell anything at a loss by default, and require an application for an exception to the law to permit "loss leaders". An exception process is needed because some loss-leaders like soup kitchens are deemed to have social benefits, and others are deemed not to harm the market, such as mints on hotel pillows. That means you too, Mr. Nonprofit. There's nothing that says companies have to be monopolies to cause "harm to the consumer" and there's nothing that says markets depressed at the hands of non-profits are beneficial to the consumer either.
Now that's quite a kettle of fish we've gotten ourselves into, isn't it?
I think it requires... wait for it... judgement. That's right. Judges will actually have to judge.
What's are the general guidelines for judgement? I think there should be 3 classes of works as far as sampling is concerned. Class 1: The samples are more like notes, it's difficult to tell where they came from, or even if you can tell where they came from the resulting composition is a totally new work. Sampling artist keeps all royalties. Class 2: extensive use of sampling to the point where you have a medley or a "cover" of an existing work or works. In that case, the sampling artist should pay whatever they pay now to do a cover, except that this fee might be divided among several artists. Many "house mixes" would probably be class 2. Class 3: outright copying of a song, with digital or analog modifications providing little more than a thin veil over the original material, and not adding any real original value. To the Class 3 "artist" sorry--no soup for you. You forfeit any royalties you earn back to the original artist.
Now, I realize there are all kinds of shades of meaning in between these classes, and no easy answer. It's a shame we don't do more jury trials for cases like this, because I think most ordinary people would be able to figure this out without writing 1600 page anesthesia documents. The Verve example cited is a classic case of Class 1 sampling that was hammered as if it were Class 3 trash. I never would have known the Stones had a hand in there if I hadn't been told.
I just don't get all this obsession with The Matrix. Yeah, it was a cool movie. So what?
So. The sequel is "just an action flick". What do you expect? I mean, the first movie captured the goth and hacker aesthetics. Furthermore, it did so with a decent plot line. Also, it did that during a time when freaks were making $60,000 as "web designers". Now those people have normal hair cuts and colors, have pulled their piercings, and are either layed off or underemployed. Goth and network admin poseurs are so 90s now.
So what are you expecting from The Matrix Reloaded?
Quit reloading Slashdot, and quit reloading your life. Make something new. Something different. I don't care what you do. Go to Afghanistan, feed some kids, and get yourself shot. I really don't care. Just quit pissing and moaning about some stupid Hollywood attempt to milk what they think is a cash cow (but really isn't) and come back when you have something interesting to talk about.
They went for the blade-server market, which was not a mistake.
Embedded (under certain circumstances) is not a mistake either, but it's a very competitive market.
They've ignored the quiet PC market, and that was a huge mistake.
OK, here comes the clarification. The power savings of TMTA chips don't matter much for mobiles, because the power profile is dominated by the monitor and other devices, not the CPU. The one advantage the chip does offer for mobiles is low heat disipation, but they didn't pitch that. Instead, they marketed enhanced battery life and when that (predictably) didn't materialize, they started to look like Enron execs.
The power savings matter a great deal for server farms, because when you jam 1000s of CPUs into a room, all those watts add up quickly, and you also reduce the cost of cooling the room. In general, when TMTA's chips are scattered all over the place, the heat dissipation and power savings don't matter that much. When the chips are packed together in small spaces, then it matters, which brings us to...
...The quiet PC. The low heat allows TMTA chips to run FANLESS. This wasn't emphasized enough by their marketing or engineering departments, and as a result there are virtually NO PCs being made with TMTA's chips, and there are no inexpensive motherboards using a TMTA chip. That market has been conceded entirely to VIA's mini-itx boards. This is a real shame, because apparently the TMTA chips can (in theory) perform better than VIA's chips and do so without a fan. Also, TMTA squandered its geek appeal by making it very difficult for anybody to experiment with their chips. I haven't seen any SBCs with a TMTA chip in them for under $600. The chip itself is available for $90 in single units, but there is nothing to plug it into. Since Intel chips cost about the same, I don't see any argument for why TMTA can't get somebody to make inexpensive MoBos. That is an oversight that must be corrected.
If you look at the mini-itx.com site, you'll see that most of the projects are hobbiest kitsche. I imagine that most of the projects at the original Homebrew Computer Club were like that too; but one of them was the first Apple. Unless TMTA gets its/\55 in gear, it will end up like Zilog instead of Motorola.
It's very, very ironic that Linus works for a company that has failed so miserably to understand the importance of hackers and the "garage" in driving the industry. I haven't heard him say anything about advocating within TMTA to make their hardware more open. Notice, I mean open in the sense that you should be able to buy components separately and tinker with them; I'm not asking TMTA to give up any copyrights or patents.
For example, in theory, you can emulate any CPU by writing your own code-morphing software. Now, I defy anybody to find the documents that tell you how to do that.
If vendors ever became that dependant on Transmeta, bankruptcy would be extremely unlikely; especially if a company the size of Dell were dependant. I'll leave it as an excercise for the reader to figure out why that is.
This article is just stirring the pot (no pun intended). No US official has said "Canada cares too much about liberties". Police everywhere have to balance timeliness of action against risks to the innocent. It's ridiculous to think that any two countries would choose to place the balance at the exact same place, and therefore inevitable that police from one country will find fault with police from another, either thinking that they err too much one one side or the other.
The author's points about drug policy being tied to trade policy, resulting in the further erosion of NAFTA and diplomatic relations are well made, but they have nothing to do with the latest report from the US State Department.
The friction over decriminalizing pot reminds me of the debates regarding lotteries here in the US. When one state gets a lottery, the border state always feels pressure to get a lottery, citing revenue lost to the other state. It's plain to see that Canada will become a haven for "drug tourists", resulting in an erosion of prohibition in the US. I strongly doubt that the US would do anything to interfere with Canada's sovereignty (as some have suggested), other than wrecking NAFTA which is pretty much wrecked anyway.
So... this whole article is just an attempt to make more friction between two historic allies. Why? What interest does the author have in destroying the US-Canada relationship?
I can't believe some of the outright falsehoods being thrown around here about healthcare in the US.
You didn't say this, but another guy said that the only way you could purchase insurance is through an employer. FALSE!!! I'm not sure about other states, but here in Virginia (a very right-wing state too) anybody can purchase Blue Cross/Blue Shield and they CANNOT BE DENIED. For someone age 35, it's about $114-$200/mo depending on the deductable you choose.
Me? I don't buy it. I follow the other American plan called "rolling the dice". What happens if I roll snake eyes?
I'll tell you what happens. First, I lose almost my whole my life savings. BwwAAAAAAAAAHAAA. I can just hear the bleeding hearts now. But guess what? That's my choice. What happens next? Once I reach a fixed allowance, I go on Medicaid. The fixed allowance permits me to have a small cash savings ($2000 in most parts of the country) and if I own a home I get to keep it--even if it's a $500,000 box mansion in Great Falls, I get to keep it, as long as it's my primary residence.
The care that people receive on Medicaid is higher than what you'd be able to get in many countries, and is on par with what everybody gets in countries with socialized medicine. Yes, sometimes medicaid care is inadquate, but sometimes socialized medicine is inadequate too. After all, Medicaid is socialized medicine. If you want to see what SM would be like in America, visit people on Medicaid. At least I have the opportunity to prevent myself from going there. This is the land of opportunity, not the land of the free lunch. I can become a success, and then I am free from worry, instead of being held back by the confiscatory taxes that would be necessary for socialized medicine.
Do you think defense contractors screw the government? Just wait for socialized medicine. You just know that all those "liberal" CEOs who donate to the Democratic Party are just salivating at the prospect of $600 syringes to match the $600 hammers that the "conservative" CEOs sold to the military.
And as surely as our military can conquer but not control, socialized medicine will be able to cure the simple but not the complicated.
OK, I can't read Russian, but how does the head of Energia know who pressed what in the capsule? Is there video in the capsule? If so, then I can buy that. OTOH, if there is just telemetry of what's pressed, then it could have been anybody, or it could have been a short in the switch.
So. Is there unquestionable evidence that this happened, or just some guy mouthing off because he doesn't like us, or would rather blame a foreigner than have to hurt the career of somebody in his own country?
I have a hard time believing that none of the US media outlets would have picked up this story if there was any weight to it. At the very least they would report that people in Russia "are saying this". If there's truth to this, and people are trying to cover it up, it's classic "60 Minutes" material, with two stories--one of which must be a lie. There's no way they can keep a lid on it.
That's funny. I'm an American and I don't feel the least bit "favored" by software patents. AFAIK, all of those corporations aren't really American anyway. I'm sick and tired of the US being criticized for the actions of multinationals who only remain in the US because that's where they got started, and who will readily reincoroprate on some tropical island if they think they can save on taxes.
Or the ideal of having techies paid for services - technical support, and custom programming (which is what a large part of the programming workforce does anyway - most professional programmers aren't paid to work on Office or OpenOffice.) - is "communism"?
Whenever I see that argument, a couple things leap to mind. First, if such a large percentage of software is written as a service, then there should be no need to spend much time fussing about the other, much smaller percentage of software that isn't written as a service. The other thing that comes to mind is that since RMS argues that software as "product" is immoral, the fact that product developers are a minority means that RMS and the Free Software movement are spending an awful lot of time attempting to inconvenience a minority. You have to wonder why.
But this is tangential to the thread we have here, which is whether or not RMS is a communist. My dictonairy defines a communist as one who advocates communism (duh.). So, we have to look at the definition of communism. The dictionary defines that as 1. "any economic theory or system based on the ownership of all property by the community as a whole". I think you'd have to do some pretty severe mental gymnastics not to equate the Free Software movement with communism on that count, so long as you limit the scope of his communism to software The keyword here is all. You could use that keyword to argue that he isn't a communist because he only wants software to be common. However, if RMS had a natural talent for something else, you have to wonder what kind of rationale he would have come up with for communising property within that profession. It seems only logical that a communist working in a particular field would seek to communize that field, but not others. Therefore, RMS is a communist and the Free Software movement is a communist movement.
At this point, many of you will hold out and say something to the effect that this is a "benign kind of communism, more like communalism".
The dictonairy also states (and I'll paraphrase this one because it's long) that a characteristic of communism is that it seeks to achieve an ideal classeless community via violent, dictatorial means. While the Free Software movement isn't violent or dictatorial, it is certainly coercive, and RMS's mode of authority seems to be one of top-down control seeking rather than consensus building. Fortunately, we can only speculate as to whether or not an empowered RMS would become a dictator.
The whole importance of RMS smacks of a cult of personality, which is another aspect of "communism" that the dictonairy describes as "the doctrines, methods, etc. of Communist parties".
The dictonairy does not define communism as a pejorative, although in many parts of the U.S. it is. I think perhaps that's why so many people are reluctant to admit that RMS is a communist--because it would be pejorative, not because it wouldn't be true.
The dictonairy also defines it as 4. "loosly, communalism".
Insults aside, I think RMS and his organization easily satisfy the dictonairy definition of "communist organization" but they probably aren't a "Communist organization" as in "Communist Party USA" or the international Communist Party. In other words, I'm not sitting here wearing a tinfoil hat speculating about RMS having a scrabmled sat phone that links him to a secret underground bunker in Moscow filled with KGB waiting for an opportunity to emerge from their hideaouts and restore the Soviet Union. It's just that if such a thing exists, they wouldn't disagree with him.
While there is plenty of room for RMS and his backers to wiggle away from the word "communist", I think there's enough to make the word stick, and I wouldn't attack anybody for using it. I've used it myself, but usually I just call him a "radical leftist" because it's not as pejorative as "communist" and it doesn't lead people to believe he's a formal member of the Communist Party, which as far as I know, he isn't.
I was going to say that, but you beet me to it (groan).
Pulling is probably not practical. Some weeds like dandelions have long tap roots. Either the weed is very hard to pull, or you break off the tap root and the weed is back up in just a few days. Sometimes I can wiggle a dandelion juuust right and get most of the tap root, but more often than not I break them. I imagine training a robot to do it would be pretty difficult. Of course, I don't try to dig 'em because that would just make the lawn even uglier. In a field you don't care about things looking pretty, but then you'd have to worry about damaging the root system of the crop plants; so digging is out.
That said, it would be nice to have an organic farmer's version of the robot that ran more frequently and clipped the weed at the base.
Well, $70,000 went for legal fees. $19,000 for publicity, $15,000 for fancy lunches, $11,000 for limo rides, and $45,000 for clothing. We figure the artists owe them somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000.
Well... before the knee-jerk MS-bashing starts, let's think about it.
If you patch, you have to recompile the component, and possibly re-boot the machine or re-start the application. This is true for Linux too (unless there's a way to fast-swap kernels that I haven't heard about).
If you update, you don't need to re-start anything.
If you patch, you could have to patch just about anything on the system.
If you update, you are working through one application.
Of course, there's nothing to stop an OSS developer from writing something that just sniffs incoming data for known exploits, like a virus scanner does.
Ahhh... but that would slow the system down.
So I think you have to add "better performance" to the pro-patch argument.
But then, there is probably less effort to updating, especially if it's automated. Is there any OSS system with automated patching that people are willing to trust?
Either way, I think it's an interesting discussion. In practice, I patch.
I don't run my website anymore, but when I did I had framed navigation by default, and the option of not using frames. Just give the user two options: 1. pay royalties to these people and continue with frames. or 2. no frames.:)
It was great because it was such an aberration for Hollywood. I wonder what they had to do to get that thing made. I mean, the Greens party was actually villainized right at the start. The story of how they got that script out has to be almost as good as the movie.
If you've never seen the movie we're talking about here, Red Dawn, rent it and try to remember that the Soviet Union and nuclear annihilation were still a viable threat when it was made. Either it'll reinforce your opinions about the 2nd ammendment, or you'll think it's total schlock but you won't be bored and you're not likely to have a neutral opinion about it.
I thought "computer clubs" were in vogue until about ten or fifteen years ago.
I was going to say twenty. Just for the heck of it, I went to a local PCUG about 2 years ago, and it was all guys with grey hair who knew eachother. The last time computing had any kind of a "club community" feel to it was when I went to a Commodore swap meet in the late 1980s.
Yeah, yeah, there are LUGs and all that, but an after-school computer club just seems very 80s to me. Maybe you could use vintage hardware and play Flock of Seagulls and stuff, make it an 80s nostalgia club. I mean, the "computer club" now is just a bunch of people who like to go over to some other guys house and play games or something. If you don't already know some people like that, I feel sorry for you.
The closest thing we had to a "computer club" when I went to school was the Fantasy Gaming club. Yes, the stereotypes are true. There was no need to establish a CC because everybody in FG had a C, and if you weren't in FG there was nothing to stop you from, well... hanging out with those people, which is what I did.
"The Muslims are bound by their conditions except a condition which forbids the Halaal or permits a Haraam."
Well then, that lets out pirating most of our movies, since they go way beyond simply unveiling the women. Ditto for any music with suggestive lyrics. Not sure what percentage of music could be considered Haraam. Of course this skirts the crux of the issue which is whether or not copyright restrictions "forbid" a Halaal. Is it Halaal to employ somebody without paying them? Apparently so, since the passage cited expresses a preference for libaration, but doesn't condemn slavery. So, if you regard an absence of IP law as a condition where the artist isn't paid, then even though that's slavery the passage doesn't condemn it. Of course, many on Slashdot argue that for music the performance is the work and not the copy. That argument holds some water if the artist was employed with the understanding that he was being paid only for his performance and for all the rights, including the right for the payor to redistribute copies. However, this doesn't resolve the issue of something like computer software where nobody cares about the performance... at least I've never seen anybody pay to watch some hacker sit and debug C for 10 hours. I don't know how old the passage is, but it just goes to show that people have been wrestling with this issue for a long time, and will probably continue to do so.
The bottom line? When something about IP isn't fair, everybody knows it.
...now the "censored" folder on my desktop has nazi.gif in it. I didn't think that'd ever happen. It's just more ironic distribution, but if Penny Arcade is actually going to try and exploit their legal troubles to promote their lousy comics, I may engage in ironic deletion.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, so are we now on the record that *any* government meddling on what you can sell is bad? Wanna repeal antitrust now? I mean, what it all boils down to is that some people don't like the way other people are doing business, so they want the government to outlaw it. Congratulations my friend, now you know how Bill Gates feels, and why he was so "arrogant" when the government effectively criminalized his "'unapproved by the government' donations in kind".
Good point. This would definitely require some tweaking. For starters, we could try it just with corporations, not individuals, and see how it works. Lotsa luck singling out corps though...
When it comes to disposing of inventory, I guess the corps could be required to auction it in bulk lots. That way, inventory clearance can't be used to mask anti-competitive pricing practices.
I find it amusing that the home gardening crowed shows such a great interest in inexpensive "bedding plants" that are defended by nursery-supported patents and grown by "The Great Satans" of home lumberyards. It goes to show you how strong and creative this community is, and highlights upon some of the beneficial fundamental values that the gardening crowd holds: freedom of expression in horticulture. Sappy huh. =)
At the heart of the gardening debate (or very close to it), I think that Big Box Stores want to prevent propogation and resale of bedding plants because it reveals to customers the true identity of the plants: greenery that is being sold far too cheaply; an entry into the gardening market that would be completely unsustainable if Big Box Stores were not monopolies (I.E. able to sustain gross losses in many other markets in order to direct/force attention back to their housewares and appliances).Get it? These kinds of business practices are not unique to Microsoft or computing, or to monopolies. The bit about bedding plants is real. I was reading about it in the Washington Post just the other day. Ever wonder how stores make money selling potted azaleas for $5? Answer: they don't. They're just hoping to pull you in so you'll buy a mower or something that really makes them money. Remember, from the POV of SCO, Linux looks like the same kind of unfair pricing that the XBox looks like to a lot of people on Slashdot, and in both cases people are willing to twist the law to "fix" the problem. The real problem? The real "heart of the debate"?
Business law.
A more broad, sweeping fix? Make it illegal for anyone to sell anything at a loss by default, and require an application for an exception to the law to permit "loss leaders". An exception process is needed because some loss-leaders like soup kitchens are deemed to have social benefits, and others are deemed not to harm the market, such as mints on hotel pillows. That means you too, Mr. Nonprofit. There's nothing that says companies have to be monopolies to cause "harm to the consumer" and there's nothing that says markets depressed at the hands of non-profits are beneficial to the consumer either.
Now that's quite a kettle of fish we've gotten ourselves into, isn't it?
I think it requires... wait for it... judgement. That's right. Judges will actually have to judge.
What's are the general guidelines for judgement? I think there should be 3 classes of works as far as sampling is concerned. Class 1: The samples are more like notes, it's difficult to tell where they came from, or even if you can tell where they came from the resulting composition is a totally new work. Sampling artist keeps all royalties. Class 2: extensive use of sampling to the point where you have a medley or a "cover" of an existing work or works. In that case, the sampling artist should pay whatever they pay now to do a cover, except that this fee might be divided among several artists. Many "house mixes" would probably be class 2. Class 3: outright copying of a song, with digital or analog modifications providing little more than a thin veil over the original material, and not adding any real original value. To the Class 3 "artist" sorry--no soup for you. You forfeit any royalties you earn back to the original artist.
Now, I realize there are all kinds of shades of meaning in between these classes, and no easy answer. It's a shame we don't do more jury trials for cases like this, because I think most ordinary people would be able to figure this out without writing 1600 page anesthesia documents. The Verve example cited is a classic case of Class 1 sampling that was hammered as if it were Class 3 trash. I never would have known the Stones had a hand in there if I hadn't been told.
<rant>
I just don't get all this obsession with The Matrix. Yeah, it was a cool movie. So what?
So. The sequel is "just an action flick". What do you expect? I mean, the first movie captured the goth and hacker aesthetics. Furthermore, it did so with a decent plot line. Also, it did that during a time when freaks were making $60,000 as "web designers". Now those people have normal hair cuts and colors, have pulled their piercings, and are either layed off or underemployed. Goth and network admin poseurs are so 90s now.
So what are you expecting from The Matrix Reloaded?
Quit reloading Slashdot, and quit reloading your life. Make something new. Something different. I don't care what you do. Go to Afghanistan, feed some kids, and get yourself shot. I really don't care. Just quit pissing and moaning about some stupid Hollywood attempt to milk what they think is a cash cow (but really isn't) and come back when you have something interesting to talk about.
</rant>
Because.
Sheesh! First semester philosophy students (grumble, grumble)...
ALL NEW DATABACE. OVER 50,000 CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES. GAURANTEED TO WORK. JUST SEND $29.95 TO IVAN RIPITOV, PO BOX 456, MOSCOW, RUSSIA.
Send e-mail to ivan@mafia.ru for more info on daplamas, diploomas, penice and virginia enlargement.
Going for the mobile market is indeed a mistake.
They went for the blade-server market, which was not a mistake.
Embedded (under certain circumstances) is not a mistake either, but it's a very competitive market.
They've ignored the quiet PC market, and that was a huge mistake.
OK, here comes the clarification. The power savings of TMTA chips don't matter much for mobiles, because the power profile is dominated by the monitor and other devices, not the CPU. The one advantage the chip does offer for mobiles is low heat disipation, but they didn't pitch that. Instead, they marketed enhanced battery life and when that (predictably) didn't materialize, they started to look like Enron execs.
The power savings matter a great deal for server farms, because when you jam 1000s of CPUs into a room, all those watts add up quickly, and you also reduce the cost of cooling the room. In general, when TMTA's chips are scattered all over the place, the heat dissipation and power savings don't matter that much. When the chips are packed together in small spaces, then it matters, which brings us to...
...The quiet PC. The low heat allows TMTA chips to run FANLESS. This wasn't emphasized enough by their marketing or engineering departments, and as a result there are virtually NO PCs being made with TMTA's chips, and there are no inexpensive motherboards using a TMTA chip. That market has been conceded entirely to VIA's mini-itx boards. This is a real shame, because apparently the TMTA chips can (in theory) perform better than VIA's chips and do so without a fan. Also, TMTA squandered its geek appeal by making it very difficult for anybody to experiment with their chips. I haven't seen any SBCs with a TMTA chip in them for under $600. The chip itself is available for $90 in single units, but there is nothing to plug it into. Since Intel chips cost about the same, I don't see any argument for why TMTA can't get somebody to make inexpensive MoBos. That is an oversight that must be corrected.
If you look at the mini-itx.com site, you'll see that most of the projects are hobbiest kitsche. I imagine that most of the projects at the original Homebrew Computer Club were like that too; but one of them was the first Apple. Unless TMTA gets its /\55 in gear, it will end up like Zilog instead of Motorola.
It's very, very ironic that Linus works for a company that has failed so miserably to understand the importance of hackers and the "garage" in driving the industry. I haven't heard him say anything about advocating within TMTA to make their hardware more open. Notice, I mean open in the sense that you should be able to buy components separately and tinker with them; I'm not asking TMTA to give up any copyrights or patents.
For example, in theory, you can emulate any CPU by writing your own code-morphing software. Now, I defy anybody to find the documents that tell you how to do that.
If vendors ever became that dependant on Transmeta, bankruptcy would be extremely unlikely; especially if a company the size of Dell were dependant. I'll leave it as an excercise for the reader to figure out why that is.
This article is just stirring the pot (no pun intended). No US official has said "Canada cares too much about liberties". Police everywhere have to balance timeliness of action against risks to the innocent. It's ridiculous to think that any two countries would choose to place the balance at the exact same place, and therefore inevitable that police from one country will find fault with police from another, either thinking that they err too much one one side or the other.
The author's points about drug policy being tied to trade policy, resulting in the further erosion of NAFTA and diplomatic relations are well made, but they have nothing to do with the latest report from the US State Department.
The friction over decriminalizing pot reminds me of the debates regarding lotteries here in the US. When one state gets a lottery, the border state always feels pressure to get a lottery, citing revenue lost to the other state. It's plain to see that Canada will become a haven for "drug tourists", resulting in an erosion of prohibition in the US. I strongly doubt that the US would do anything to interfere with Canada's sovereignty (as some have suggested), other than wrecking NAFTA which is pretty much wrecked anyway.
So... this whole article is just an attempt to make more friction between two historic allies. Why? What interest does the author have in destroying the US-Canada relationship?
I can't believe some of the outright falsehoods being thrown around here about healthcare in the US.
You didn't say this, but another guy said that the only way you could purchase insurance is through an employer. FALSE!!! I'm not sure about other states, but here in Virginia (a very right-wing state too) anybody can purchase Blue Cross/Blue Shield and they CANNOT BE DENIED. For someone age 35, it's about $114-$200/mo depending on the deductable you choose.
Me? I don't buy it. I follow the other American plan called "rolling the dice". What happens if I roll snake eyes?
I'll tell you what happens. First, I lose almost my whole my life savings. BwwAAAAAAAAAHAAA. I can just hear the bleeding hearts now. But guess what? That's my choice. What happens next? Once I reach a fixed allowance, I go on Medicaid. The fixed allowance permits me to have a small cash savings ($2000 in most parts of the country) and if I own a home I get to keep it--even if it's a $500,000 box mansion in Great Falls, I get to keep it, as long as it's my primary residence.
The care that people receive on Medicaid is higher than what you'd be able to get in many countries, and is on par with what everybody gets in countries with socialized medicine. Yes, sometimes medicaid care is inadquate, but sometimes socialized medicine is inadequate too. After all, Medicaid is socialized medicine. If you want to see what SM would be like in America, visit people on Medicaid. At least I have the opportunity to prevent myself from going there. This is the land of opportunity, not the land of the free lunch. I can become a success, and then I am free from worry, instead of being held back by the confiscatory taxes that would be necessary for socialized medicine.
Do you think defense contractors screw the government? Just wait for socialized medicine. You just know that all those "liberal" CEOs who donate to the Democratic Party are just salivating at the prospect of $600 syringes to match the $600 hammers that the "conservative" CEOs sold to the military.
And as surely as our military can conquer but not control, socialized medicine will be able to cure the simple but not the complicated.
OK, I can't read Russian, but how does the head of Energia know who pressed what in the capsule? Is there video in the capsule? If so, then I can buy that. OTOH, if there is just telemetry of what's pressed, then it could have been anybody, or it could have been a short in the switch.
So. Is there unquestionable evidence that this happened, or just some guy mouthing off because he doesn't like us, or would rather blame a foreigner than have to hurt the career of somebody in his own country?
I have a hard time believing that none of the US media outlets would have picked up this story if there was any weight to it. At the very least they would report that people in Russia "are saying this". If there's truth to this, and people are trying to cover it up, it's classic "60 Minutes" material, with two stories--one of which must be a lie. There's no way they can keep a lid on it.
Source? Don't just say "Budarin". If he said that, he had to say it to somebody. Who did he say it to?
That's funny. I'm an American and I don't feel the least bit "favored" by software patents. AFAIK, all of those corporations aren't really American anyway. I'm sick and tired of the US being criticized for the actions of multinationals who only remain in the US because that's where they got started, and who will readily reincoroprate on some tropical island if they think they can save on taxes.
Or the ideal of having techies paid for services - technical support, and custom programming (which is what a large part of the programming workforce does anyway - most professional programmers aren't paid to work on Office or OpenOffice.) - is "communism"?
Whenever I see that argument, a couple things leap to mind. First, if such a large percentage of software is written as a service, then there should be no need to spend much time fussing about the other, much smaller percentage of software that isn't written as a service. The other thing that comes to mind is that since RMS argues that software as "product" is immoral, the fact that product developers are a minority means that RMS and the Free Software movement are spending an awful lot of time attempting to inconvenience a minority. You have to wonder why.
But this is tangential to the thread we have here, which is whether or not RMS is a communist. My dictonairy defines a communist as one who advocates communism (duh.). So, we have to look at the definition of communism. The dictionary defines that as 1. "any economic theory or system based on the ownership of all property by the community as a whole". I think you'd have to do some pretty severe mental gymnastics not to equate the Free Software movement with communism on that count, so long as you limit the scope of his communism to software The keyword here is all. You could use that keyword to argue that he isn't a communist because he only wants software to be common. However, if RMS had a natural talent for something else, you have to wonder what kind of rationale he would have come up with for communising property within that profession. It seems only logical that a communist working in a particular field would seek to communize that field, but not others. Therefore, RMS is a communist and the Free Software movement is a communist movement.
At this point, many of you will hold out and say something to the effect that this is a "benign kind of communism, more like communalism".
The dictonairy also states (and I'll paraphrase this one because it's long) that a characteristic of communism is that it seeks to achieve an ideal classeless community via violent, dictatorial means. While the Free Software movement isn't violent or dictatorial, it is certainly coercive, and RMS's mode of authority seems to be one of top-down control seeking rather than consensus building. Fortunately, we can only speculate as to whether or not an empowered RMS would become a dictator.
The whole importance of RMS smacks of a cult of personality, which is another aspect of "communism" that the dictonairy describes as "the doctrines, methods, etc. of Communist parties".
The dictonairy does not define communism as a pejorative, although in many parts of the U.S. it is. I think perhaps that's why so many people are reluctant to admit that RMS is a communist--because it would be pejorative, not because it wouldn't be true.
The dictonairy also defines it as 4. "loosly, communalism".
Insults aside, I think RMS and his organization easily satisfy the dictonairy definition of "communist organization" but they probably aren't a "Communist organization" as in "Communist Party USA" or the international Communist Party. In other words, I'm not sitting here wearing a tinfoil hat speculating about RMS having a scrabmled sat phone that links him to a secret underground bunker in Moscow filled with KGB waiting for an opportunity to emerge from their hideaouts and restore the Soviet Union. It's just that if such a thing exists, they wouldn't disagree with him.
While there is plenty of room for RMS and his backers to wiggle away from the word "communist", I think there's enough to make the word stick, and I wouldn't attack anybody for using it. I've used it myself, but usually I just call him a "radical leftist" because it's not as pejorative as "communist" and it doesn't lead people to believe he's a formal member of the Communist Party, which as far as I know, he isn't.
You need it to retrieve your doctoral thesis. Remember?
I was going to say that, but you beet me to it (groan).
Pulling is probably not practical. Some weeds like dandelions have long tap roots. Either the weed is very hard to pull, or you break off the tap root and the weed is back up in just a few days. Sometimes I can wiggle a dandelion juuust right and get most of the tap root, but more often than not I break them. I imagine training a robot to do it would be pretty difficult. Of course, I don't try to dig 'em because that would just make the lawn even uglier. In a field you don't care about things looking pretty, but then you'd have to worry about damaging the root system of the crop plants; so digging is out.
That said, it would be nice to have an organic farmer's version of the robot that ran more frequently and clipped the weed at the base.
Boot to Windows and run NOSMOKE.EXE. Most of you know it as a hardware fix, but it'll patch the kernel too. Is there anything it can't do?
Well, $70,000 went for legal fees. $19,000 for publicity, $15,000 for fancy lunches, $11,000 for limo rides, and $45,000 for clothing. We figure the artists owe them somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000.
Pay up, suckas.
Well... before the knee-jerk MS-bashing starts, let's think about it.
If you patch, you have to recompile the component, and possibly re-boot the machine or re-start the application. This is true for Linux too (unless there's a way to fast-swap kernels that I haven't heard about).
If you update, you don't need to re-start anything.
If you patch, you could have to patch just about anything on the system.
If you update, you are working through one application.
Of course, there's nothing to stop an OSS developer from writing something that just sniffs incoming data for known exploits, like a virus scanner does.
Ahhh... but that would slow the system down.
So I think you have to add "better performance" to the pro-patch argument.
But then, there is probably less effort to updating, especially if it's automated. Is there any OSS system with automated patching that people are willing to trust?
Either way, I think it's an interesting discussion. In practice, I patch.
I don't run my website anymore, but when I did I had framed navigation by default, and the option of not using frames. Just give the user two options: 1. pay royalties to these people and continue with frames. or 2. no frames. :)
It was great because it was such an aberration for Hollywood. I wonder what they had to do to get that thing made. I mean, the Greens party was actually villainized right at the start. The story of how they got that script out has to be almost as good as the movie.
If you've never seen the movie we're talking about here, Red Dawn, rent it and try to remember that the Soviet Union and nuclear annihilation were still a viable threat when it was made. Either it'll reinforce your opinions about the 2nd ammendment, or you'll think it's total schlock but you won't be bored and you're not likely to have a neutral opinion about it.
I thought "computer clubs" were in vogue until about ten or fifteen years ago.
I was going to say twenty. Just for the heck of it, I went to a local PCUG about 2 years ago, and it was all guys with grey hair who knew eachother. The last time computing had any kind of a "club community" feel to it was when I went to a Commodore swap meet in the late 1980s.
Yeah, yeah, there are LUGs and all that, but an after-school computer club just seems very 80s to me. Maybe you could use vintage hardware and play Flock of Seagulls and stuff, make it an 80s nostalgia club. I mean, the "computer club" now is just a bunch of people who like to go over to some other guys house and play games or something. If you don't already know some people like that, I feel sorry for you.
The closest thing we had to a "computer club" when I went to school was the Fantasy Gaming club. Yes, the stereotypes are true. There was no need to establish a CC because everybody in FG had a C, and if you weren't in FG there was nothing to stop you from, well... hanging out with those people, which is what I did.
"The Muslims are bound by their conditions except a condition which forbids the Halaal or permits a Haraam."
Well then, that lets out pirating most of our movies, since they go way beyond simply unveiling the women. Ditto for any music with suggestive lyrics. Not sure what percentage of music could be considered Haraam. Of course this skirts the crux of the issue which is whether or not copyright restrictions "forbid" a Halaal. Is it Halaal to employ somebody without paying them? Apparently so, since the passage cited expresses a preference for libaration, but doesn't condemn slavery. So, if you regard an absence of IP law as a condition where the artist isn't paid, then even though that's slavery the passage doesn't condemn it. Of course, many on Slashdot argue that for music the performance is the work and not the copy. That argument holds some water if the artist was employed with the understanding that he was being paid only for his performance and for all the rights, including the right for the payor to redistribute copies. However, this doesn't resolve the issue of something like computer software where nobody cares about the performance... at least I've never seen anybody pay to watch some hacker sit and debug C for 10 hours. I don't know how old the passage is, but it just goes to show that people have been wrestling with this issue for a long time, and will probably continue to do so.
The bottom line? When something about IP isn't fair, everybody knows it.
...now the "censored" folder on my desktop has nazi.gif in it. I didn't think that'd ever happen. It's just more ironic distribution, but if Penny Arcade is actually going to try and exploit their legal troubles to promote their lousy comics, I may engage in ironic deletion.