I don't know about everyone else, but I can't think when the clothes I'm wearing are uncomfortable. If I am more productive when I'm wearing jeans and a t-shirt then management will allow it.
My guess is that if you think jeans and a tshirt are comfortable you have never had a pair of nice slacks on. I used to wear jeans and such. Then i discovered the art of Nordstroms and nice slacks. Yeah, they may cost $60 a pair. A good pair of slacks is like coding in pajamas.
I can fully believe he's an adult because I've had almost the same rant a few times. I've also worked in a really great development area that had no fucking special geeks with their damned starwars toys and imaginary light sabers and we did a lot better there.
There is no correlation between star wars obsessed dipshits and good coders. I view that as a deficit in their abilities. If they can't figure out how to behave in regards to those around them, they obviously don't have the problem solving skills necessary.
I don't have a complaint at all. I was simply disagreeing with a poster saying that if you post data through HTTP you more or less deserve people ripping you off because it's a publicly accessible format.
If a publisher chooses to hand out copies of their work on the street, and tell them they can only use them for XYZ, and the people that receive them violate that they are in fact doing something wrong.
Publishing something on the internet on your own site still maintains copyright to you. To embed the contents (excluding the 'handout') into a different page is no different than including a stolen document in with your text.
Uhm, you know that could almost make sense if it wasn't just stupid.
You are talking about costs. Yes, costs. Costs are associated with running anything. You know what else? All those big companies are making a profit (well, most) so I fail to see your logic.
If I run a site and publish artwork or photographs, I expect the common decency of mankind and a naive sense that people aren't bastards (I know, delusional but it's nice to try to think good things)and not have my artwork stolen from me. If someone frames my work on their site, they are stealing from me. Not only are they taking my digital property, but they are taking my bandwidth. This is something that is quantifiable and a very real cost. It's one thing when you post something on your site and let people view it. It's another thing when your work is just ripped off and you get nothing in return except some lost bandwidth.
So.. uh, no I don't get your point mostly because I don't think you have one.
They are talking about framing. Linking to a site is not, and never has been illegal. Framing an image into your site however is. This is the point.
Reference the DeCSS case to learn about the legalities of linking, or the eBay case to find out how far you can take it.
It would be more like someone walking into the library, flipping the book open to a certain page, photocopying that to make an exact duplicate in quality, charging the library for the ink and electricity and then posting it wherever you see fit. This is just plain wrong. No matter how it gets justified. No matter how 'open' HTTP is as a protocol.
Uhm, I did not say he was a hypocrite. Why don't you read my comment before spewing drivel out. I said if he complains, he is.
You are right, spamming isn't the same. Spamming would be the same if they linked to your copyrighted work and mailed it out in their spam to a couple hundred thousand email addresses. All of which that get opened cost you money from bandwidth.
The whole front door open argument was a sarcastic Your-argument-is-fucking-stupid one, unfortunately it was missed. I'll make sure to make it even more unbelievable and stupid next time.
Here's a better analogy:
I have an art gallery, with a poster illustrating my work. You walk by with a handy compact professional digital copier and make an exact duplicate of my poster. You then hang the copy of the poster on the side of your gallery, and charged me for the paper and ink of printing it.
Oops, guess I make more sense than you realized? Shouldn't you be in school?
Well, when you print a book out and hope that nobody types the text and posts it online it's no different. Everything is publically accessible. If people were moral and ethical, we wouldn't need copyright law, trademark law, patent law, civil law, etc. The problem is that any person can pretty much take whatever they want, assuming it is within their physical space (or digital space).
People just have the attitude it's ok to violate copyright just because it's online and available over HTTP. That is absolutely retarded. If I post a print of my artwork up on the side of my art gallery, you don't have the right to take it make a duplicate of the print and post it on the side of your gallery. It's the same thing, fuck the procedure the end result is the same -- you ripped me off.
That isn't the point. The point is when you frame an image on your own site, you are blatantly stealing from me. The digital aspect of it aside, you are stealing my bandwidth. As well, You are not allowed to frame copyrighted material inside your own publication without prior consent.
Just because you make something available to the public, does not mean the public has a right to take it.
No, I just figured that the usage of sarcasm to demonstrate a point. Unfortunately, it seems that sarcasm tags are not rendered properly. I can understand the confusion, this is slashdot and there are masses of stupid comments. I suppose I should have been more clear.
The usage of a stupid and pointless argument, countering another stupid and pointless post with the usage of sarcasm and directly making fun of the idiocy of the previous statement is often used. I suppose I just should have made it more outragous.
My argument and all of it's stupidness were meant to invalidate the parents stupidness. It was purposefully meant to be like that, unfortunately the point was seemingly to be missed.
The issue at hand is not as to whether or not you want people to access it. The question is whether or not I want people to rip me off. Obviously, the answer is no.
The whole problem with this is that morality and integrity, and general accountability has gone out the window and replace with this "But I can do it so easy on the internet it can't be wrong!" mentality.
As far as cost goes, I was referring to bandwidth. A quantifiable cost associate with a product and property. Next time you get pissed off that someone is spamming you, remember to not use the 'It's taking up my bandwidth or time' because those are things that can both cost money, and you don't want to lose. And if you do, remember you are a hypocrite.
You are right. For instance, you have a front door that is widely left unlocked because it's an open standard and I can easily just learn how to unlock it. So if I want to use your couch in my living room, and you don't like it then it's just absurd to whine that people dare actually use locks to protect their belongings.
The whole thing is a sense of ownership, and at the moment dignity and trust to not just steal other peoples work. And don't give me the "it's just digital, I'm not costing him any money" argument, because you are. Hosting costs money. Bandwidth costs money.
If you think you can violate copyrights just because it's put on the web, I have a clue-by-four I'd like you to meet.
Well, duh, obviously a whole hell lot of people think so, Does Napster ring a bell?
Yeah sure, so does the fact that CD sales increased. You are still clueless and/or trolling.
Because right now most people think they are buy something material and not the music object, per se So tell me, is it hard work knowing what most people think? The fact is you have no clue what people think. Hell, i don't even think you know what you think reading this thread again. The people are buying something material. They are buying something they can touch. What's on it, that's another matter. CDs are no different than books, except they are easier to copy.
What happens if the Big media collapses (i know, i know, just bare with me) and you no longer have Big media paying artists to produce. How Are You Going to Pay Them, because they will need to be paid, if just to eat?
My guess is, since "making a digital copy costs almost nothing" they will *gasp* make digital copies and license music out that way. Heaven forbid the artists actually use technology. Oh wait, most of them already do.
Our ideas that We have a Right to listen or see anything, may change. Huh? Who the hell has that idea now?
I think what may happen is that You and I are going to very IP... Uhh.. what?
And what You and I are going to pay for is access to what this Mind (the artist) creates. How is that different than it is now?
Mod Totals: -1 Clueless, -1 Nonsensical, -1 Seems to be karma whoring by using a lot of buzzwords and not making much sense in relation to the article nor reality.
SecurityFocus.com has absolutely nothing on their site about this article.
I would find it at very best to be poor journalism to label an operating system more secure just based on the fact that it has less published vulnerabilities. First off, it's easier to locate vulnerabilities in *NIX software. Windows it isn't, mostly because it's closed up and the Windows common user is not motivated with finding a security exploit.
If you look at the types, and severity (which I'm hoping the article does) of it and summise a judgement based off that I think it's pretty obvious which operating system is more secure.
Either this is a/. troll, and they didn't bother to realize the DNS for wininformant.com doesn't exist, or wininformant.com is dead at the moment, or wininformant.com is a group of Microsoft FUD monkeys, or I'm running the wrong desktop OS.
The 9 9s problem was great! I don't think I've clicked through a slashdot ad previously in months (since before xmas, at least) because they just seem.. pointless.
I spent a few minutes solving it out, and then continued on. It was a targetted *fun* ad. People need to come up with ads that are fun, and get the target doing something they like to do.
Wow, seems you actually do have somewhat of a basis. First off, I know 4 different martial arts. Amongst them is Jiu-Jitsu. And you know what? The form of kung-fu that I study incorporates a lot of grappling technique. It is a well rounded art.
I never said these tournaments were under-ground. However, "No Holds Barred" tournaments are for television. Full contact sparring is for martial artists.
I never said no art was the best. Taking an art that is well rounded, diverse, and exceptionally adaptive is your best key to winning any fight. Our techniques are more inclined towards street fighting than arena fighting. Tae Kwon Do, you get to learn Olympic style sparring.. exciting. Jiu-Jitsu, that's fine and all but you better hope to hell they don't know grab counters or you are going to end up losing.
My mind is expansive, and I look at the facts. The facts show that a well rounded adaptive art is superior to those of fixed styles and stances.
As for my full contact experience, I have. I have also been thrown about 6 feet back through 3 rows of chairs out of the sparring platform and then into a brick wall. I have had a cup get cracked from a blow. And I'm not sure where you got secretive from. Go to a good martial arts school and grab their flyers. Last time I checked there were 3 tournaments going on in the next couple of months that included full contact matches.
You seem to think I'm disrespecting the grappling form. I'm not. I'm saying that there is no point to study something that isolates one form of fighting when you can take an art that goes over everything. Hence, why we have Sifu Al Dacascos and Sifu Bill Owens that have ranked top 10 in the world opens. Look up Al Dacascos, a ricipient of the living legend award, on more magazines covers than I can count, and has won over 200 championships. I think he knows how to fight.
I used to date a girl whose fathers father worked for some government contract oufit (can't remember off the top of my head). He was part of the program to build the first digital clock. So, his team managed to do it and for about $60K in parts they built a clock that was slightly smaller than your desktop computers and used the nixie tubes for the display. This was by far the coolest clock I have ever seen, and probably ever will see. The girls dad ended up giving me the clock because of my fascination (and even he wasnt supposed to have it, funny story behind that for a later date) and the girl took it when we split up. One of those things I will never get over, but these clocks are so incredibly cool. I'm definitely not a compotent electrical engineer type person but would definitely consider buying one if anyone is in the building market.
I recently moved out of that godforsaken place, and found it very common.
Course, I ate at pubs most the time where everything was marinated in guinness so that may have something to do with it.
If you want to go to a great restaurant that isn't too awful spending check out Bella Vista up on Skyline near the 84 intersection. Amazing view and good food.
Oh, right. You phrased it as such that you were qualifying it.
So tell me then, Mr. Wise-Fighter. What forms of Kung Fu did you study? And grappling? And name a "no-holds barred" tournament you have entered?
And bring those IFC-toting brutes to a traditional full contact match (Yes, that is much more brutal than anything you see in "no-holds barred", as in it's not made for TV or for an audience) and see how well they fare.
You don't know shit about martial arts, your terminology gives it away. You speak like one of those people who thinks that taking an art for 3 months and getting a yellow belt, and watching UFC/IFC/WWF makes it so you know what you are talking about.
Here, I'll give you a chance to qualify yourself:
About Kung Fu: What form of kung fu did you study, who is your sifu and from what origin is your art (region wise)
About Jeet "Kunedo": What belt did you receive and what was your first form, including your sifu?
You see, real martial artists (with the exception of the Gracie family, and their UFC involvement which still amazes me) don't fight in a "no-holds barred" tournament because, well, it's stupid. We fight in "full contact" tournaments of different calibers. You really are just upset because I'm right and it pisses you off, aren't you?
1. The source code and any disks containing Windows 3.11 and Win32s. Sure.. because Microsofts engineering is so horrible that no good can come out of it. I forgot.
2. All the AOL CDs on the planet - though that would break the damned thing, wouldn't it? And all the people who collect them like baseball cards for entertainment, and a company that really did in fact do a good thing by publicising the internet and in many ways making a space for slashdot to exist?
4. The Microsoft Marketing Department. How have they made the industry go to hell? They were one of the main forced behind creating the "industry".
5. Larry Elliston's ego. I don't know Mr. Elliston. I know Mr. Ellison is a hardworking individual, and deserves what he got through a good product, and a commitment to working hard.
6. Ditto for BillG, SMcNealy and SJobs Yeah, because they didn't do revolutionary things that helped create an entire industry employing hundreds of thousands of people.
Yeah - you did forget everything. You forgot what made this industry what it is. You forgot that your sense of humor sucks ass monkeys. And you forgot that it was past your bedtime.
I never said Immigrants are lesser people. No, but you explicitely implied they are an evil in America, taking over America from citizens. (Reference your comment about non-citizens infiltrating a citizens workforce) - That attack is racist. No matter how you want to look at it, the supremacy laced in that statement is disgusting.
The Immigration Reform Act had a lot of different reasons. Not just because US was being a brain drain. Not a china mans chance? Yep, you guessed it. Helping people who need it, not those who are just looking for more money.
Again, show conclusive proof of a 60% increase. Considering no unemployment rate in the country (isolated by region) has increased more than 3% in the last year I'm sensing a pile of bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about everyone else, but I can't think when the clothes I'm wearing are uncomfortable. If I am more productive when I'm wearing jeans and a t-shirt then management will allow it.
My guess is that if you think jeans and a tshirt are comfortable you have never had a pair of nice slacks on. I used to wear jeans and such. Then i discovered the art of Nordstroms and nice slacks. Yeah, they may cost $60 a pair. A good pair of slacks is like coding in pajamas.
I can fully believe he's an adult because I've had almost the same rant a few times. I've also worked in a really great development area that had no fucking special geeks with their damned starwars toys and imaginary light sabers and we did a lot better there.
There is no correlation between star wars obsessed dipshits and good coders. I view that as a deficit in their abilities. If they can't figure out how to behave in regards to those around them, they obviously don't have the problem solving skills necessary.
I don't have a complaint at all. I was simply disagreeing with a poster saying that if you post data through HTTP you more or less deserve people ripping you off because it's a publicly accessible format.
If a publisher chooses to hand out copies of their work on the street, and tell them they can only use them for XYZ, and the people that receive them violate that they are in fact doing something wrong.
Publishing something on the internet on your own site still maintains copyright to you. To embed the contents (excluding the 'handout') into a different page is no different than including a stolen document in with your text.
Uhm, you know that could almost make sense if it wasn't just stupid.
You are talking about costs. Yes, costs. Costs are associated with running anything. You know what else? All those big companies are making a profit (well, most) so I fail to see your logic.
If I run a site and publish artwork or photographs, I expect the common decency of mankind and a naive sense that people aren't bastards (I know, delusional but it's nice to try to think good things)and not have my artwork stolen from me. If someone frames my work on their site, they are stealing from me. Not only are they taking my digital property, but they are taking my bandwidth. This is something that is quantifiable and a very real cost. It's one thing when you post something on your site and let people view it. It's another thing when your work is just ripped off and you get nothing in return except some lost bandwidth.
So.. uh, no I don't get your point mostly because I don't think you have one.
They are talking about framing. Linking to a site is not, and never has been illegal. Framing an image into your site however is. This is the point.
Reference the DeCSS case to learn about the legalities of linking, or the eBay case to find out how far you can take it.
It would be more like someone walking into the library, flipping the book open to a certain page, photocopying that to make an exact duplicate in quality, charging the library for the ink and electricity and then posting it wherever you see fit. This is just plain wrong. No matter how it gets justified. No matter how 'open' HTTP is as a protocol.
Uhm, I did not say he was a hypocrite. Why don't you read my comment before spewing drivel out. I said if he complains, he is.
You are right, spamming isn't the same. Spamming would be the same if they linked to your copyrighted work and mailed it out in their spam to a couple hundred thousand email addresses. All of which that get opened cost you money from bandwidth.
The whole front door open argument was a sarcastic Your-argument-is-fucking-stupid one, unfortunately it was missed. I'll make sure to make it even more unbelievable and stupid next time.
Here's a better analogy:
I have an art gallery, with a poster illustrating my work. You walk by with a handy compact professional digital copier and make an exact duplicate of my poster. You then hang the copy of the poster on the side of your gallery, and charged me for the paper and ink of printing it.
Oops, guess I make more sense than you realized? Shouldn't you be in school?
Well, when you print a book out and hope that nobody types the text and posts it online it's no different. Everything is publically accessible. If people were moral and ethical, we wouldn't need copyright law, trademark law, patent law, civil law, etc. The problem is that any person can pretty much take whatever they want, assuming it is within their physical space (or digital space).
People just have the attitude it's ok to violate copyright just because it's online and available over HTTP. That is absolutely retarded. If I post a print of my artwork up on the side of my art gallery, you don't have the right to take it make a duplicate of the print and post it on the side of your gallery. It's the same thing, fuck the procedure the end result is the same -- you ripped me off.
That isn't the point. The point is when you frame an image on your own site, you are blatantly stealing from me. The digital aspect of it aside, you are stealing my bandwidth. As well, You are not allowed to frame copyrighted material inside your own publication without prior consent.
Just because you make something available to the public, does not mean the public has a right to take it.
No, I just figured that the usage of sarcasm to demonstrate a point. Unfortunately, it seems that sarcasm tags are not rendered properly. I can understand the confusion, this is slashdot and there are masses of stupid comments. I suppose I should have been more clear.
The usage of a stupid and pointless argument, countering another stupid and pointless post with the usage of sarcasm and directly making fun of the idiocy of the previous statement is often used. I suppose I just should have made it more outragous.
My argument and all of it's stupidness were meant to invalidate the parents stupidness. It was purposefully meant to be like that, unfortunately the point was seemingly to be missed.
The issue at hand is not as to whether or not you want people to access it. The question is whether or not I want people to rip me off. Obviously, the answer is no.
The whole problem with this is that morality and integrity, and general accountability has gone out the window and replace with this "But I can do it so easy on the internet it can't be wrong!" mentality.
As far as cost goes, I was referring to bandwidth. A quantifiable cost associate with a product and property. Next time you get pissed off that someone is spamming you, remember to not use the 'It's taking up my bandwidth or time' because those are things that can both cost money, and you don't want to lose. And if you do, remember you are a hypocrite.
You are right. For instance, you have a front door that is widely left unlocked because it's an open standard and I can easily just learn how to unlock it. So if I want to use your couch in my living room, and you don't like it then it's just absurd to whine that people dare actually use locks to protect their belongings.
The whole thing is a sense of ownership, and at the moment dignity and trust to not just steal other peoples work. And don't give me the "it's just digital, I'm not costing him any money" argument, because you are. Hosting costs money. Bandwidth costs money.
If you think you can violate copyrights just because it's put on the web, I have a clue-by-four I'd like you to meet.
Well, duh, obviously a whole hell lot of people think so, Does Napster ring a bell?
Yeah sure, so does the fact that CD sales increased. You are still clueless and/or trolling.
Because right now most people think they are buy something material and not the music object, per se
So tell me, is it hard work knowing what most people think? The fact is you have no clue what people think. Hell, i don't even think you know what you think reading this thread again. The people are buying something material. They are buying something they can touch. What's on it, that's another matter. CDs are no different than books, except they are easier to copy.
What happens if the Big media collapses (i know, i know, just bare with me) and you no longer have Big media paying artists to produce. How Are You Going to Pay Them, because they will need to be paid, if just to eat?
...
My guess is, since "making a digital copy costs almost nothing" they will *gasp* make digital copies and license music out that way. Heaven forbid the artists actually use technology. Oh wait, most of them already do.
Our ideas that We have a Right to listen or see anything, may change.
Huh? Who the hell has that idea now?
I think what may happen is that You and I are going to very IP
Uhh.. what?
And what You and I are going to pay for is access to what this Mind (the artist) creates.
How is that different than it is now?
Mod Totals: -1 Clueless, -1 Nonsensical, -1 Seems to be karma whoring by using a lot of buzzwords and not making much sense in relation to the article nor reality.
wininformant.com fails to resolve.
/. troll, and they didn't bother to realize the DNS for wininformant.com doesn't exist, or wininformant.com is dead at the moment, or wininformant.com is a group of Microsoft FUD monkeys, or I'm running the wrong desktop OS.
SecurityFocus.com has absolutely nothing on their site about this article.
I would find it at very best to be poor journalism to label an operating system more secure just based on the fact that it has less published vulnerabilities. First off, it's easier to locate vulnerabilities in *NIX software. Windows it isn't, mostly because it's closed up and the Windows common user is not motivated with finding a security exploit.
If you look at the types, and severity (which I'm hoping the article does) of it and summise a judgement based off that I think it's pretty obvious which operating system is more secure.
Either this is a
If they were the faces of the marketing team, I would see those as a huge success.
"Shock our marketing team and WIN big!"
Hell, the only prize I would want is a webcam watching their marketing folk get smacked with a cattle prod every time someone won.
The 9 9s problem was great! I don't think I've clicked through a slashdot ad previously in months (since before xmas, at least) because they just seem.. pointless.
I spent a few minutes solving it out, and then continued on. It was a targetted *fun* ad. People need to come up with ads that are fun, and get the target doing something they like to do.
I love your sig, just thought I'd share. :)
The Gracies are martial arts based off respect, their skill is seperate from their life as martial artists.
Wow, seems you actually do have somewhat of a basis. First off, I know 4 different martial arts. Amongst them is Jiu-Jitsu. And you know what? The form of kung-fu that I study incorporates a lot of grappling technique. It is a well rounded art.
I never said these tournaments were under-ground. However, "No Holds Barred" tournaments are for television. Full contact sparring is for martial artists.
I never said no art was the best. Taking an art that is well rounded, diverse, and exceptionally adaptive is your best key to winning any fight. Our techniques are more inclined towards street fighting than arena fighting. Tae Kwon Do, you get to learn Olympic style sparring.. exciting. Jiu-Jitsu, that's fine and all but you better hope to hell they don't know grab counters or you are going to end up losing.
My mind is expansive, and I look at the facts. The facts show that a well rounded adaptive art is superior to those of fixed styles and stances.
As for my full contact experience, I have. I have also been thrown about 6 feet back through 3 rows of chairs out of the sparring platform and then into a brick wall. I have had a cup get cracked from a blow. And I'm not sure where you got secretive from. Go to a good martial arts school and grab their flyers. Last time I checked there were 3 tournaments going on in the next couple of months that included full contact matches.
You seem to think I'm disrespecting the grappling form. I'm not. I'm saying that there is no point to study something that isolates one form of fighting when you can take an art that goes over everything. Hence, why we have Sifu Al Dacascos and Sifu Bill Owens that have ranked top 10 in the world opens. Look up Al Dacascos, a ricipient of the living legend award, on more magazines covers than I can count, and has won over 200 championships. I think he knows how to fight.
I used to date a girl whose fathers father worked for some government contract oufit (can't remember off the top of my head). He was part of the program to build the first digital clock. So, his team managed to do it and for about $60K in parts they built a clock that was slightly smaller than your desktop computers and used the nixie tubes for the display. This was by far the coolest clock I have ever seen, and probably ever will see. The girls dad ended up giving me the clock because of my fascination (and even he wasnt supposed to have it, funny story behind that for a later date) and the girl took it when we split up. One of those things I will never get over, but these clocks are so incredibly cool. I'm definitely not a compotent electrical engineer type person but would definitely consider buying one if anyone is in the building market.
I recently moved out of that godforsaken place, and found it very common.
Course, I ate at pubs most the time where everything was marinated in guinness so that may have something to do with it.
If you want to go to a great restaurant that isn't too awful spending check out Bella Vista up on Skyline near the 84 intersection. Amazing view and good food.
Oh, right. You phrased it as such that you were qualifying it.
So tell me then, Mr. Wise-Fighter. What forms of Kung Fu did you study? And grappling? And name a "no-holds barred" tournament you have entered?
And bring those IFC-toting brutes to a traditional full contact match (Yes, that is much more brutal than anything you see in "no-holds barred", as in it's not made for TV or for an audience) and see how well they fare.
You don't know shit about martial arts, your terminology gives it away. You speak like one of those people who thinks that taking an art for 3 months and getting a yellow belt, and watching UFC/IFC/WWF makes it so you know what you are talking about.
Here, I'll give you a chance to qualify yourself:
About Kung Fu: What form of kung fu did you study, who is your sifu and from what origin is your art (region wise)
About Jeet "Kunedo": What belt did you receive and what was your first form, including your sifu?
You see, real martial artists (with the exception of the Gracie family, and their UFC involvement which still amazes me) don't fight in a "no-holds barred" tournament because, well, it's stupid. We fight in "full contact" tournaments of different calibers. You really are just upset because I'm right and it pisses you off, aren't you?
1. The source code and any disks containing Windows 3.11 and Win32s.
Sure.. because Microsofts engineering is so horrible that no good can come out of it. I forgot.
2. All the AOL CDs on the planet - though that would break the damned thing, wouldn't it?
And all the people who collect them like baseball cards for entertainment, and a company that really did in fact do a good thing by publicising the internet and in many ways making a space for slashdot to exist?
4. The Microsoft Marketing Department.
How have they made the industry go to hell? They were one of the main forced behind creating the "industry".
5. Larry Elliston's ego.
I don't know Mr. Elliston. I know Mr. Ellison is a hardworking individual, and deserves what he got through a good product, and a commitment to working hard.
6. Ditto for BillG, SMcNealy and SJobs
Yeah, because they didn't do revolutionary things that helped create an entire industry employing hundreds of thousands of people.
Yeah - you did forget everything. You forgot what made this industry what it is. You forgot that your sense of humor sucks ass monkeys. And you forgot that it was past your bedtime.
I never said Immigrants are lesser people.
No, but you explicitely implied they are an evil in America, taking over America from citizens. (Reference your comment about non-citizens infiltrating a citizens workforce) - That attack is racist. No matter how you want to look at it, the supremacy laced in that statement is disgusting.
The Immigration Reform Act had a lot of different reasons. Not just because US was being a brain drain. Not a china mans chance? Yep, you guessed it. Helping people who need it, not those who are just looking for more money.
Again, show conclusive proof of a 60% increase. Considering no unemployment rate in the country (isolated by region) has increased more than 3% in the last year I'm sensing a pile of bullshit.