However, the caveat I would add is that as long as this increased spending did not come from social welfare budgets, health, education etc.
It is not as simple as that. For example, if diverting money from social programmes to industry boosts employment, then the welfare budget can shrink with no ill-effect because fewer people need it. If diverting money from education to space research means that grants for physics postdocs are approved by a different committee than before, then the net result is likely to be little different. If money is diverted from healthcare to orbital laboratories, which then come up with new drugs, then that's actually better for the nation's health.
The best place for an increased NASA budget to come from is military spending. If the amount of effort and money that is spent on creating items of destruction was put into space exploration I'd say we'd be in for some exciting times.
A lot of space activity is funded from military spending. The USAF are prolific satellite enthusiasts, for example. That brings down the cost of launching for everyone and funds development of sensors and signal processing technology that can be used by scientists.
What I would really like to see is some military spending diverted to fusion research. That would be win-win - a scalable power source, both for use on Earth and to power spacecraft on long missions, and it would also meet the military's goal of increasing national security by reducing reliance on the Middle East. Frankly I am surprised that alternative sources of power aren't receiving more interest at present.
This puts the China-India space race and the China-USA space race in a very different light and clearly indicates that China plans to play with the big boys of Mars exploration.
It's not a race in any meaningful sense right now - China has only said it intends to do something that the US has already done, after all. It will become considerably more interesting if a non-NASA space agency - the Chinese, the Indians, the Europeans - announces that it fully intends to land and recover a manned Mars mission before NASA can. My money's on the Chinese - they're the ones with the most to prove, Europe is too apathetic and India cannot devote the resources to it that China's command economy can. As to whether they beat NASA... well that really boils down to the man in the White House. The US/Soviet Empire space race was all about trying to convince the nonaligned nations which political system was the best... it wasn't about scientists competing purely for prestige, it was a battle of national Will. If the US decides that it is going to be impressive enough to take the lead in getting to Mars, then the Chinese would face some stiff competition. Maybe if Russia had more money it could partner with ESA, make it a 3-way race, maybe Japan could join that consortium.
Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is. Some things just aren't meant to be used by the blind. What's next? Will they sue Ford or GM because the speedometer of car isn't audible?
This isn't anything to do with the blind at all, and never was - it's about lawyers smelling a way to use someone else's misfortune to make themselves a quick buck. So much easier to chase a blind man than an ambulance, see.
As an aside, if these so-called advocacy groups have a better solution, let's hear it. All they are saying is that they'll block one of the few solutions that does exist, which isn't very constructive. That is further evidence that they're only in it for the money.
Yeah, I read the article about the audio solution, but the article also says it doesn't work nearly as well, and it wasn't thought up by one of these lawyers anyway, but by their intended victims.
Transactions should be short and simple as well. Having a hanging transaction is one of a DBAs worst nightmares.
I can guess you come from the Sybase world. Come over to Oracle, my friend. Writers do not block readers, readers do not block writers, locks never escalate and deadlocks are automatically detected and resolved. Transactions can therefore be as complex as you want them to be, you can't hurt the database with a bad one.
It is a better argument for intellectual freedom to point out how the free flow of information has bettered our world, for example the Gutenberg Bible and medical knowledge, than to say, incorrectly, that it was always like that before and now we are being oppressed.
But in order to be granted a patent you must publish all the details of the thing you've patented. Try actually reading beyond the title "A method of doing X" and you will find the method described in great detail. You can study it all you want. The only stipulation is that the information may not used without the permission of the author for a few years. This is the best of both worlds: it provides a mechanism by which expensive information may be created, yet makes the information freely available after a period of time, or available for a fee immediately.
Information expensive, you say? But I can download it for free! Sure you can duplicate it for free, but information is expensive to produce. If it's scientific, the equipment has to be paid for, the salaries of the janitors, etc. People don't clean toilets for free because the people who use 'em are working to advance mankind, you know! If it's media, then there are a lot of people to pay, most of them union workers.
Maybe it does not formally constitue proof of life, but have you thought how we could set up a base there that would burn hydrogen for energy?
More usefully, if you have hydrogen and CO2 (which Mars' atmosphere is largely comprised of) you can easily manufacture kerosene using the Sabatier reaction, which is a much better fuel. The way things are going, tho', we'll be mining He3 on the moon for fusion reactors before there is a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
Re:helping the handicapped illegal?
on
Hacking the XBox
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I would think that the Americans With Disabilities Act, combined with the many lobby groups for the disabled, would stomp all over anyone or any group attempting to block someone assisting the handicapped...
Sorry, but that argument ranks along side publishing techniques for duplicating PS2 games but claiming it's only a technique for "backing up". You can't hijack a particular group's interests and use them to advance your own like this. Example: you can't steal something from a store and offer as your defense in court "but I planned to donate it to charity". Well, you can, but it won't work. If you want to "hack" your X-box, at least have the balls to do it openly, don't cower behind a person in a wheelchair.
Said m0rp3us, leader of the group "3y3 0f th3 d0g," "zero-click" will order various items automatically using already stored in a user's billing info.
I wish Amazon would let me correlate delivery addresses with birthdays with cash limits with wish lists, and submit orders automatically whenever everything aligned, so I could completely automate gift-remembering.
I would say IBM is a services company first and foremost. But their big enough that they're really about a dozen companies all working o their own thing. The DB2 team is as happy to sell you DB2 on Solaris as on AIX, or Windoes, or Linux, or IBM Mainframes. (I been pitched by the DB2/Solaris sales team).
True - but an emergent property of their organization is that if the chip people decide they can make more money by investing in GCC as a loss leader to sell more chips, the IBM compiler people won't be able to stop them even if it means lower compiler sales. We saw this when the PC group within IBM made up its own mind on whether or not it should preinstall OS/2.
The concept of "profit" entirely depends on what it is you are trying to accomplish. For most people/organizations, profit is measured in money. But RMS doesn't need to worry about money (the MacArthur Foundation saw to that when they gave him a grant) so his concept of profit is "how many people have seen my name?". That's why he insists on the widest possible distribution with the caveat that his name must appear. RMS' motivations aren't so different from anyone elses as one might suppose.
Supposedly Apple and IBM *are* pouring effort into PPC970 code generation for gcc. Scheduling and what not are different on the PPC970 than on the G4 so they ARE making the effort. One article I read somewhere said that is one of the hold ups for the machines in the first place. Getting a compiler that can make them fly.
That would make sense. After all, IBM are a hardware company first and foremost. Anything that makes it easier and cheaper for people to develop applications on their hardware is good for them. If you start with the assumption "lots of people use GCC on AIX anyway" (which may or may not be true) then enhancing GCC is a win-win.
If everyone benchmarked with open source compilers, there would be none of the shady benchmark-specific optimizations you'd expect to see in proprietary compilers. Everything would be above the table.
Errmm, but GCC does generate SSE2 instructions. There is a switch -msse2 to enable it. There was no good reason for Apple to have SSE2 disabled, other than to cripple the competition. Notice that they did use G5-specific switches on GCC on their own system.
Such as Home or Apartment Rentals. Anyone ever rent an apartment before?
Yeah, but this is like paying your landlord the rent and being able to move between any of the apartments he owns, whenever you feel like it. Not quite the same thing at all. I don't think you can even do that sort of deal with a hotel.
They've also got a patent on not being able to find my DVDs for at least a week and a half after I send them back.
Funny, dvdsontap.com did the same thing to me, claimed to have received back an empty case. I've taken to videoing myself putting the DVDs back in the cases and sealing it in the envelope, with my digital camera.
What have you got to say for yourselves now, dumbasses? This may not contain the exact stuff that they're all worked up about (although it sounds like they want to claim RCU entirely), but it is a patch for source that does contain the offending material and therefore a derivative work.
I expect they will say that IBM didn't have the right to release it under the GPL (I don't have a copy of the file you refer to but I presume it is in reverse chronological order otherwise how could IBM copyright it after it was GPL'd). It seems to say that Paul McKenney - who has an IBM email address, but might have originally worked for Sequent - wrote some stuff, then Dipankar Sarma modified it in 2001, then later IBM GPL'd it.
Second, the fact they require a lot of libraries is *good*. The goal of Object Oriented Programming is code-reuse; this is considered a Good Thing. Now, libraries aren't necessarily OO in nature, but the fact that all these apps use a core set of functionality is really A Good Thing.
In practice, that's not what happens, tho'. Different developers prefer different libraries, so rather than have one library for each piece of common functionality, it actually works out that you have one complete set of libraries for each application - even if that app only uses a tiny fraction of the APIs in library that it insists is present.
Example: back in the day on commercial Unix, X applictions used the Motif libraries, and that was that. Nowadays on Linux with open source apps, you need to have Lesstif, GTK+, GNOME, etc etc, all doing the same thing in different ways.
So many obvious ideas which require little though have been patented, and when someone puts an enormous amount of effort into actually *implementing* something they get sued.
But you cannot patent an idea without an implementation. Try actually reading beyond the title of the patent (which is always very general) to see the actual body (which is always very specific).
Imagine that, someone had patented a nuclear powered submarine propulsion system before anyone had even exploded an atom bomb.
You do know that nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants work differently, right? There were reactors running at Los Alamos well before there were weapons, and there is absolutely no technological reason that humanity couldn't have skipped making nuclear weapons altogether but still had all the benefits of nuclear power.
The point is so many of these patents are granted to people who haven't implemented anything when all the work is in the implementation.
Interesting you should say that because the implementation if the patent system is what's broken, not the principle.
They could access the internet, they just didn't get it for free.
TANSTAAFL. It does have to be paid for, in this case the money comes from sales of.nu domains. Which is much better than just dropping the cost on the taxpayer and calling it "free", but the point is, the money has to come from somewhere.
I wonder how long it would take Oracle to turn an open source JVM into an Oracle product in much the same way as they turned Apache into 9iAS.
Oracle already do have a JVM, it's called Aurora or JServer or maybe it's been renamed again (I'm old-skool so I still say Aurora, which is a nice name). Within its niche, it's shockingly good - I've seen it 50x faster than Sun's, and with an overhead of 20K per VM. Yup, K. Of course, it's this fast because it has no GUI support whatsoever, runs in-process with the core database engine, and leverages Oracle's very mature and thoroughly optimized threading and IPC code. Rather than JIT, it's compiled to similar parse trees as Oracle's PL/SQL engine uses when you load it in.
I live in Central London (in England). They recently imposed a congestion charge. Had they used eBay first, they might have discovered that the "correct" price was £3, not £5 to get traffic down to required levels.
The problem with the congestion charge in London is its second-order effects. The people who are really suffering at the retailers, either because people aren't driving into the city centre to do their shopping (see Oxford Street during the day... it's half dead) or because GBP 5/day/person isn't getting spent in the sandwich and coffee places or the pubs. Just what the struggling retail sector needs right now. Livingstone threw the baby out with the bathwater, as they say. And where's the money going? If anything the Tube's getting worse!
What PC and Mac users can't seem to understand is that 64-bit desktops were commonplace in the early 90s among the very large technical computing market - everything from universities to engineering firms to Hollywood studios. I am incredulous at all the hype that both Apple and Intel are spreading - for almost 10 years, it's been unusual for me to only use 32-bit processors!
I wonder how one of these Apples would stack up against an SGI Fuel with an R16K.
But the scary part is that that statement is the absolute truth. Look at all the people that sign up for MSN, AOL, and own Windoze Boxes.
Before you get too smug, think about all the people who only run Linux because they want to be "cool" and in with the "geeks". It's just as much marketing as anything Microsoft does. Think about that every time you read a "Linux advocacy" document.
There is a big difference between fascists and communists, being that the fascists kill people before they attain state power, while the communists wait until after they attain state power.
Historically, there may be a broad correlation there, but I'm afraid that you will also find that fascist governments have been democratically elected too, whereas no communist government ever has (unless you count the Peronists).
I suggest you look up the October Revolution and the 1918-1922 Russian civil war. The communist ascent to power was hardly bloodless. That they got worse after taking power doesn't change the fact that they did use violence to obtain power.
Therefore, if you want to keep the communists from killing people, just make sure they never get enough sway to seize state power.
The victims of the Shining Path would disagree with that hypothesis... and the victims of the Baader-Meinhof Gang... those are just off the top of my head, if I went to Google I could find many more examples of very bloodthirsty Communist groups without any State power.
When has a communist group in the US ever committed the level of violence that fascist groups in the US have? Timothy McVeigh? Chester Doles? Matt Hale? Benjamin Smith?
I'll flip it around; when as a fascist ever betrayed his country like the Rosenbergs?
Please don't think I'm defending fascism... I merely point out that the only difference between fascism and communism is that fascism talks about "the fatherland" and communism talks about "the people". In practice, they are identical: command economies, charismatic leaders, secret police, persecution of ethnic minorities, calls for self-sacrifice, etc etc. Hitler and Stalin weren't enemies, they were rivals!
Therefore, if you want to keep the communists from killing people, just make sure they never get enough sway to seize state power.
The genuine anti-fascists do not describe themselves as such, they call themselves (for example) "pro-democracy". One cannot define oneself in terms of things one is not.
Slashdot Mirror
However, the caveat I would add is that as long as this increased spending did not come from social welfare budgets, health, education etc.
It is not as simple as that. For example, if diverting money from social programmes to industry boosts employment, then the welfare budget can shrink with no ill-effect because fewer people need it. If diverting money from education to space research means that grants for physics postdocs are approved by a different committee than before, then the net result is likely to be little different. If money is diverted from healthcare to orbital laboratories, which then come up with new drugs, then that's actually better for the nation's health.
The best place for an increased NASA budget to come from is military spending. If the amount of effort and money that is spent on creating items of destruction was put into space exploration I'd say we'd be in for some exciting times.
A lot of space activity is funded from military spending. The USAF are prolific satellite enthusiasts, for example. That brings down the cost of launching for everyone and funds development of sensors and signal processing technology that can be used by scientists.
What I would really like to see is some military spending diverted to fusion research. That would be win-win - a scalable power source, both for use on Earth and to power spacecraft on long missions, and it would also meet the military's goal of increasing national security by reducing reliance on the Middle East. Frankly I am surprised that alternative sources of power aren't receiving more interest at present.
This puts the China-India space race and the China-USA space race in a very different light and clearly indicates that China plans to play with the big boys of Mars exploration.
It's not a race in any meaningful sense right now - China has only said it intends to do something that the US has already done, after all. It will become considerably more interesting if a non-NASA space agency - the Chinese, the Indians, the Europeans - announces that it fully intends to land and recover a manned Mars mission before NASA can. My money's on the Chinese - they're the ones with the most to prove, Europe is too apathetic and India cannot devote the resources to it that China's command economy can. As to whether they beat NASA... well that really boils down to the man in the White House. The US/Soviet Empire space race was all about trying to convince the nonaligned nations which political system was the best... it wasn't about scientists competing purely for prestige, it was a battle of national Will. If the US decides that it is going to be impressive enough to take the lead in getting to Mars, then the Chinese would face some stiff competition. Maybe if Russia had more money it could partner with ESA, make it a 3-way race, maybe Japan could join that consortium.
Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is. Some things just aren't meant to be used by the blind. What's next? Will they sue Ford or GM because the speedometer of car isn't audible?
This isn't anything to do with the blind at all, and never was - it's about lawyers smelling a way to use someone else's misfortune to make themselves a quick buck. So much easier to chase a blind man than an ambulance, see.
As an aside, if these so-called advocacy groups have a better solution, let's hear it. All they are saying is that they'll block one of the few solutions that does exist, which isn't very constructive. That is further evidence that they're only in it for the money.
Yeah, I read the article about the audio solution, but the article also says it doesn't work nearly as well, and it wasn't thought up by one of these lawyers anyway, but by their intended victims.
Me thinks the Dreamworks team had a whole lot of wholesome fun while making the movie.
I'm sure in the Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within build scripts there's support for make -Daki=naked...
Transactions should be short and simple as well. Having a hanging transaction is one of a DBAs worst nightmares.
I can guess you come from the Sybase world. Come over to Oracle, my friend. Writers do not block readers, readers do not block writers, locks never escalate and deadlocks are automatically detected and resolved. Transactions can therefore be as complex as you want them to be, you can't hurt the database with a bad one.
It is a better argument for intellectual freedom to point out how the free flow of information has bettered our world, for example the Gutenberg Bible and medical knowledge, than to say, incorrectly, that it was always like that before and now we are being oppressed.
But in order to be granted a patent you must publish all the details of the thing you've patented. Try actually reading beyond the title "A method of doing X" and you will find the method described in great detail. You can study it all you want. The only stipulation is that the information may not used without the permission of the author for a few years. This is the best of both worlds: it provides a mechanism by which expensive information may be created, yet makes the information freely available after a period of time, or available for a fee immediately.
Information expensive, you say? But I can download it for free! Sure you can duplicate it for free, but information is expensive to produce. If it's scientific, the equipment has to be paid for, the salaries of the janitors, etc. People don't clean toilets for free because the people who use 'em are working to advance mankind, you know! If it's media, then there are a lot of people to pay, most of them union workers.
Maybe it does not formally constitue proof of life, but have you thought how we could set up a base there that would burn hydrogen for energy?
More usefully, if you have hydrogen and CO2 (which Mars' atmosphere is largely comprised of) you can easily manufacture kerosene using the Sabatier reaction, which is a much better fuel. The way things are going, tho', we'll be mining He3 on the moon for fusion reactors before there is a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
I would think that the Americans With Disabilities Act, combined with the many lobby groups for the disabled, would stomp all over anyone or any group attempting to block someone assisting the handicapped...
Sorry, but that argument ranks along side publishing techniques for duplicating PS2 games but claiming it's only a technique for "backing up". You can't hijack a particular group's interests and use them to advance your own like this. Example: you can't steal something from a store and offer as your defense in court "but I planned to donate it to charity". Well, you can, but it won't work. If you want to "hack" your X-box, at least have the balls to do it openly, don't cower behind a person in a wheelchair.
Said m0rp3us, leader of the group "3y3 0f th3 d0g," "zero-click" will order various items automatically using already stored in a user's billing info.
I wish Amazon would let me correlate delivery addresses with birthdays with cash limits with wish lists, and submit orders automatically whenever everything aligned, so I could completely automate gift-remembering.
I would say IBM is a services company first and foremost. But their big enough that they're really about a dozen companies all working o their own thing. The DB2 team is as happy to sell you DB2 on Solaris as on AIX, or Windoes, or Linux, or IBM Mainframes. (I been pitched by the DB2/Solaris sales team).
True - but an emergent property of their organization is that if the chip people decide they can make more money by investing in GCC as a loss leader to sell more chips, the IBM compiler people won't be able to stop them even if it means lower compiler sales. We saw this when the PC group within IBM made up its own mind on whether or not it should preinstall OS/2.
why would you have snickered at that?
The concept of "profit" entirely depends on what it is you are trying to accomplish. For most people/organizations, profit is measured in money. But RMS doesn't need to worry about money (the MacArthur Foundation saw to that when they gave him a grant) so his concept of profit is "how many people have seen my name?". That's why he insists on the widest possible distribution with the caveat that his name must appear. RMS' motivations aren't so different from anyone elses as one might suppose.
Supposedly Apple and IBM *are* pouring effort into PPC970 code generation for gcc. Scheduling and what not are different on the PPC970 than on the G4 so they ARE making the effort. One article I read somewhere said that is one of the hold ups for the machines in the first place. Getting a compiler that can make them fly.
That would make sense. After all, IBM are a hardware company first and foremost. Anything that makes it easier and cheaper for people to develop applications on their hardware is good for them. If you start with the assumption "lots of people use GCC on AIX anyway" (which may or may not be true) then enhancing GCC is a win-win.
If everyone benchmarked with open source compilers, there would be none of the shady benchmark-specific optimizations you'd expect to see in proprietary compilers. Everything would be above the table.
Errmm, but GCC does generate SSE2 instructions. There is a switch -msse2 to enable it. There was no good reason for Apple to have SSE2 disabled, other than to cripple the competition. Notice that they did use G5-specific switches on GCC on their own system.
Such as Home or Apartment Rentals. Anyone ever rent an apartment before?
Yeah, but this is like paying your landlord the rent and being able to move between any of the apartments he owns, whenever you feel like it. Not quite the same thing at all. I don't think you can even do that sort of deal with a hotel.
They've also got a patent on not being able to find my DVDs for at least a week and a half after I send them back.
Funny, dvdsontap.com did the same thing to me, claimed to have received back an empty case. I've taken to videoing myself putting the DVDs back in the cases and sealing it in the envelope, with my digital camera.
What have you got to say for yourselves now, dumbasses? This may not contain the exact stuff that they're all worked up about (although it sounds like they want to claim RCU entirely), but it is a patch for source that does contain the offending material and therefore a derivative work.
I expect they will say that IBM didn't have the right to release it under the GPL (I don't have a copy of the file you refer to but I presume it is in reverse chronological order otherwise how could IBM copyright it after it was GPL'd). It seems to say that Paul McKenney - who has an IBM email address, but might have originally worked for Sequent - wrote some stuff, then Dipankar Sarma modified it in 2001, then later IBM GPL'd it.
Second, the fact they require a lot of libraries is *good*. The goal of Object Oriented Programming is code-reuse; this is considered a Good Thing. Now, libraries aren't necessarily OO in nature, but the fact that all these apps use a core set of functionality is really A Good Thing.
In practice, that's not what happens, tho'. Different developers prefer different libraries, so rather than have one library for each piece of common functionality, it actually works out that you have one complete set of libraries for each application - even if that app only uses a tiny fraction of the APIs in library that it insists is present.
Example: back in the day on commercial Unix, X applictions used the Motif libraries, and that was that. Nowadays on Linux with open source apps, you need to have Lesstif, GTK+, GNOME, etc etc, all doing the same thing in different ways.
So many obvious ideas which require little though have been patented, and when someone puts an enormous amount of effort into actually *implementing* something they get sued.
But you cannot patent an idea without an implementation. Try actually reading beyond the title of the patent (which is always very general) to see the actual body (which is always very specific).
Imagine that, someone had patented a nuclear powered submarine propulsion system before anyone had even exploded an atom bomb.
You do know that nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants work differently, right? There were reactors running at Los Alamos well before there were weapons, and there is absolutely no technological reason that humanity couldn't have skipped making nuclear weapons altogether but still had all the benefits of nuclear power.
The point is so many of these patents are granted to people who haven't implemented anything when all the work is in the implementation.
Interesting you should say that because the implementation if the patent system is what's broken, not the principle.
They could access the internet, they just didn't get it for free.
.nu domains. Which is much better than just dropping the cost on the taxpayer and calling it "free", but the point is, the money has to come from somewhere.
TANSTAAFL. It does have to be paid for, in this case the money comes from sales of
I wonder how long it would take Oracle to turn an open source JVM into an Oracle product in much the same way as they turned Apache into 9iAS.
Oracle already do have a JVM, it's called Aurora or JServer or maybe it's been renamed again (I'm old-skool so I still say Aurora, which is a nice name). Within its niche, it's shockingly good - I've seen it 50x faster than Sun's, and with an overhead of 20K per VM. Yup, K. Of course, it's this fast because it has no GUI support whatsoever, runs in-process with the core database engine, and leverages Oracle's very mature and thoroughly optimized threading and IPC code. Rather than JIT, it's compiled to similar parse trees as Oracle's PL/SQL engine uses when you load it in.
I live in Central London (in England). They recently imposed a congestion charge. Had they used eBay first, they might have discovered that the "correct" price was £3, not £5 to get traffic down to required levels.
The problem with the congestion charge in London is its second-order effects. The people who are really suffering at the retailers, either because people aren't driving into the city centre to do their shopping (see Oxford Street during the day... it's half dead) or because GBP 5/day/person isn't getting spent in the sandwich and coffee places or the pubs. Just what the struggling retail sector needs right now. Livingstone threw the baby out with the bathwater, as they say. And where's the money going? If anything the Tube's getting worse!
So this is just my imagination ?
What PC and Mac users can't seem to understand is that 64-bit desktops were commonplace in the early 90s among the very large technical computing market - everything from universities to engineering firms to Hollywood studios. I am incredulous at all the hype that both Apple and Intel are spreading - for almost 10 years, it's been unusual for me to only use 32-bit processors!
I wonder how one of these Apples would stack up against an SGI Fuel with an R16K.
But the scary part is that that statement is the absolute truth. Look at all the people that sign up for MSN, AOL, and own Windoze Boxes.
Before you get too smug, think about all the people who only run Linux because they want to be "cool" and in with the "geeks". It's just as much marketing as anything Microsoft does. Think about that every time you read a "Linux advocacy" document.
You do realise that you just described the current US government?
Yes, and every Islamic state too. Whatever it's called, totalitarianism is totalitarianism, the differences are merely cosmetic.
muslims in the USA are forced to register for interrogation
Still, Muslims in the US have more rights than Muslims in Saudi Arabia.
There is a big difference between fascists and communists, being that the fascists kill people before they attain state power, while the communists wait until after they attain state power.
Historically, there may be a broad correlation there, but I'm afraid that you will also find that fascist governments have been democratically elected too, whereas no communist government ever has (unless you count the Peronists).
I suggest you look up the October Revolution and the 1918-1922 Russian civil war. The communist ascent to power was hardly bloodless. That they got worse after taking power doesn't change the fact that they did use violence to obtain power.
Therefore, if you want to keep the communists from killing people, just make sure they never get enough sway to seize state power.
The victims of the Shining Path would disagree with that hypothesis... and the victims of the Baader-Meinhof Gang... those are just off the top of my head, if I went to Google I could find many more examples of very bloodthirsty Communist groups without any State power.
When has a communist group in the US ever committed the level of violence that fascist groups in the US have? Timothy McVeigh? Chester Doles? Matt Hale? Benjamin Smith?
I'll flip it around; when as a fascist ever betrayed his country like the Rosenbergs?
Please don't think I'm defending fascism... I merely point out that the only difference between fascism and communism is that fascism talks about "the fatherland" and communism talks about "the people". In practice, they are identical: command economies, charismatic leaders, secret police, persecution of ethnic minorities, calls for self-sacrifice, etc etc. Hitler and Stalin weren't enemies, they were rivals!
Therefore, if you want to keep the communists from killing people, just make sure they never get enough sway to seize state power.
The genuine anti-fascists do not describe themselves as such, they call themselves (for example) "pro-democracy". One cannot define oneself in terms of things one is not.