That depends what product exactly you want to sell
What aren't you allowed to sell? Oh drugs? Which ones would you sell? Are you oppressed because you are not allowed to enrich yourself selling drugs to children? So, you basically aspire to be a drug dealer and you feel the government is oppressing you. I guess we see where you are coming from!
The only reason the government isn't stopping you from expressing yourself however you want is because you're too damn apathetic to express yourself in any way the government could ever care about. Try protesting, in public, at a place and time where it will actually be noticed even if the protest *doesn't* turn in to a riot.
Oh, so you think blocking up a bunch of traffic and disrupting businesses is speech. It's not, its a form of passive aggressive economic terrorism. Even so, you still can express yourself in that way, but those of us with a job to do have the equal right to express ourselves by kicking your ass or paying someone to do it for us. Speech is web sites, newspapers, media, books, and yes, you can write or film whatever you want.
gain, depends exactly what you're buying. Of course, being a good little consumer, I doubt you want to buy anything the government doesn't like anyway
I have a right to keep and bear arms. As such, I have two guns, and when I get money, I will get more. If I don't like the government that much, I'll go out and shoot someone, find some like minded individuals, and start a revolution. Thus, government is by the consent of the governed. But, even when the Democrats run it, government is actually doing pretty good, so, there's no need to join a revolution at the moment. You, on the other hand, won't do anything but whine.
is clearly a very important right(!)
It certainly is. Have a look at most of the trouble spots around the world and I'd be willing to bet that you find a lot of hungry people.
The article laments that dogs killed a bunch of iguanas and a bunch of birds died because of tourism and fishing. Surely the birthplace of evolution can yield a dogproof iguana and a carproof bird. There are plenty of birds and who really likes lizards anyway. It's up to the people of the island to decide how to balance it, not you. If you want to save all those lizards, put them in your house.
How does the government really control all aspects of my life? Does the government stop me from any of the following:
a) starting a business b) selling a product c) changing jobs d) expressing myself however I want e) buying anything I want f) eating however much I want, when I want, where I want
The answer is really no. The problem is, you people don't really know what a loss of freedom really is. There are countries around the world that actively block people from any of the above. In socialist regimes, there are no jobs, and strict prohibitions against entrepreneurship, so, a-c are out. In places like China, d is out. In others, a-c, e and f are out, because there isno economic activity due to either corruption or chronic war. In some places, like North Korea, all of the items are out.
Do I like the USA PATRIOT ACT? No, I don't. However, I've not seen the Democrats do anything to even try to repeal it.
But its not that I'm "apathetic", its that, you are spoiled, and you have no idea what you really have. Talk to someone from Viet Nam whose opened up his own business in America.
Those of us who are working stiffs with a wife and kids are too old and too occupied to give a shit about whatever Kos or Moveon or Rush says. We've been through all of the self indulgent political wars already and see it for what it is.
See, here's the thing. You think the average man should be outraged because of something you read from your political propaganda site. You read all this stuff, spoon fed to you designed so that you will at least give them your vote but more likely, just more money, and really, its no different from watching advertisements. Rush, Kos, Right, Left, all these guys are out there stoking whatever political fire they can invent so they can cash in on your civic mindedness. Protesting Carter, supporting Gary Hart, early horror and then staunch support for Reagan, the Culture Wars of the early 1990s, Clinton vs Gingrich, really, been there, done that, and every step along the way, there's been someone getting rich in the name of some cause, be it a liberal author or artist, or, a right wing radio host.
You just have to let it go and look at your life and assess how things are based on people around. I guarantee that 95% of your problems are yours, and not the governments, fault. Right now, taxes are pretty low, the economy is ok, and it really has been for the last 30 years, save for a few hiccups. Bottom line is that Reaganomics worked and socialism is largely discredited, and that's that. If you choose a life where you say you don't value money, don't come crying to your political masters 20 years down the road for not having any. IT's pretty cut and dry. You need to manage your life so that it is profitable, so that you can support the ones you love, including yourself. Even an issue like global warming really has no practical impact on most people. Even if the worst comes true, and sea levels rise 100 feet, most people will just move further inland and life will go on. Support politicians that support your causes, yes, but don't let it become your life! Instead of spending so much time worrying about what Dick Cheney or Hillary Clinton are doing, worry about your own life. Then, if you do run into a government law that genuinely has an immediate impact on you. If they raise taxes, or do something stupid and get the price of fuel up to $7 / gallon, then yes, riot. If interest rates hit 15-20%, then, yes, riot. If unemployment hits 20-40%, then yes, riot. But, the bottom line, is none of those things have happened. In the grand scheme of things, we're extremely fortunate to have what we have and the rest of the world only wishes they could have our petty troubles.
Enjoy your life, because you are lucky to be American.
Seriously, if you have someone so stupid and so lacking in self discipline that they are willing to get some pussy or some cock, even if it kills them, then do you even want these people to breed? Come on, if someone can't even keep in their pants when faced with a possible shot at death, then, really, isn't it unreasonable assume that they are innately unreliable for everything else?
You underestimate the geek appeal of spaceships
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1
If you put a spaceship in front of any true geek, they'll sell out. It doesn't matter what the cause is. You give a geek enough money to build their own spaceship, or at least launch an unmanned probe to a place of their choosing, and get pictures, scientific and commercial data back, and they will sell out. Sure, advancing some quasi socialistic ideal is one thing, but, putting mankind into the stars is quite another. You just can't be a self respecting geek and not want a spaceship, or at least a cool submarine. I mean, come on!
He wrote that thing, Balance of Power, in a very classic game for Mac way long ago. Had simulated news events and a cool thing if you did screw up and trigger a nuclear war.
GPLv3 Doesn't Have to be the Only Licence
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1
I guarantee that if I built a product, and wanted it closed source using GPL materials, and sold it for a ton of money, I could negotiate separate license deals with all of the copyright holders and hire some Indians to replace the code from those holders who wouldn't sign.
So, in a sense, this license doesn't really STOP someone from making money on software, as it does, discourages it.
I bet I could even buy the right from all of GNU for less than 10 billion dollars.
Looks like they got the MS Lawyer
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I have to admit that I am more than a bit put off by the excessive wording and length of this license.
I think if I put out free software, I'm going to put it into the public domain, and I would encourage people to do the same. The fixation on limiting other people's profits from your work because you choose to do so is absurd, and in the days where it only costs $20 a month to give away a fairly large amount of source code to a fairly large amount of people, the whole point of linking the publication of the source with the distribution of a derived work is largely obsolete.
The GPL is starting to shape up as something that redistributes rights more than actually creates new ones. Software developers publishing under the GPL essentially have to waive their patent rights, waive their copyrights, so that consumers will benefit from software. Seriously, why do you care if someone gets rich off of what you wrote for free? Honestly, I'd almost rather have that, knowing that what I did made someone something, rather than none at all. Somebody else's profits do not block you from anything, and trying to make other people not earn money and not close software seems more jealousy than any practical social concern.
The absolute freest you can make your software is public domain, because public domain doesn't take away someone else's right to do something with it, and the GPL does.
Moving to native quad core has a lot of advantages and I'm actually excited to see how well this CPU will perform. Critics that claim that AMD lags behind in the process size would do well to note that AMD has ALWAYS lagged behind Intel in that category, and, yet, has managed to not only survive, but prosper.
I don't want anything that detracts from the anonymity of today's internet. I don't like spammers and online crooks, but, really, is it worth giving up fundamental liberties and crippling our right to be well, ourselves, in order to be protected from this supposedly nefarious set of villains out to get us?
Are you people that afraid, that sold on the corporate hype that you need to give up all of your rights in order to be safe? Maybe the first business of safety is to protect your rights!
Last 7 years? I'd say more like the last 30. What's been happening is a gradual escalation in political demagoguery since Reagan won in 1980s. Back then, the left went absolutely nuts and started throwing out all sorts of ridiculous charges. The right reciprocated when Clinton got elected by trying to impeach him essentially because he was a Democrat. The left, obviously ticked off, racheted up their assaults on the right to a high new level. These assaults are bleeding into lawmaking.
You saw Clinton go after the right by using the IRS to attack right wing think tanks. Then, Bush matched that by trying to get loser pays tort reform, a proposition which would bankrupt the plaintiff lawyers that drive the Democrats. And you see Republicans also proposing to allow members to opt out of union dues for political purposes, another union defunder and Democrat breaker. Now Democrats are trying to retaliate by going after right wing media - by basically banning free speech in radio.
The bottom line is, that anyone that thinks their guys, Democrat or Republican, is a fool, and anyone that goes onto a board and parrots the latest propaganda from the likes of MoveOn or National Review are even bigger fools, because they let themselves get used as puppets.
Distortions, flat out lies, go around on both sides, as if, it is settled that the truth can be sacrificed for the greater good of political victory. If you really want to take our country back, we need to realize that the people that are trying to whip up support for their own causes. People like Kos and Rush are in it to cash in, and gain personal power. They are damaged, all of these "talking heads", and they need more a good bullet to the head than to be taken as anything more as the demagoguing power mongering traitors to the American ideal that they are.
I think the internet, far from opening minds up, has driven everyone into their own little mental camps of religious orthodoxy, where people throw out claims without actually looking at things. I used to do this myself, when I was younger now. Now I am old and don't give a shit about some side or another winning. I just want to make some money and pay off all my massive credit card bills. Apple vs Atari, DOS vs CPM, Amiga vs PC, OS/2 vs Windows, BeOS vs Everybody... I've been a zealot for all of them...
As it is, Windows Server has quite a few strengths.
a) Good uptime. I use Windows Server at work and get year long uptimes. b) Easy to add, remove, users and manage groups. c) Good support for wireless networking. d) Good API for graphics and file access. e) Consistent APIs for sound and printing.
I'm not convinced that Linux wins all the time in security or in stability, in this day and age. Sure, in the days of Windows NT, absolutely, but since Windows 2000 the gap has narrowed significantly and I would not be at all surprised if, depending on the application, Windows Server can be more stable than Linux. I think to continue to say Linux is not as stable ignores that Windows has moved rather rapidly on its own, even though the gaps between major releases are long. Similarly, I would dispute the lower TCO as well. Both systems are complicated, and the biggest factor in TCO right now is going to be the level of training on both.
That's not to say that Linux doesn't have its strengths. Out of the box, C++ on 64 bit Linux is infinately better than C++ on 64 bit Windows. Visual Studio 2005 for C++ on 64 bits feels like crap, whereas KDevelop feels solid if a bit feature short - the intellisense is not particularly good, and the debugger does a horrible job with showing registers if you decide to switch to assembly view or step into assembly. However, Linux does tell time accurately, taking into good account the historical nature of time zones, whereas Windows makes no effort to do this at all. So, mktime(), or even its API underpinning LocalTimeToSystemTimeTZ (or whatever it is) on Windows will be wrong for a historical time, and on Linux it won't.
Do I want Linux to "win"? A part of me does, yes, as I'm investing more and more into learning it, and I've got three titles to be released over the next few months and a pretty cool idea for a forth. However, I'm not so silly as to buy into a religion that Linux is automatically better than Windows, as, despite all the hype to the contrary, at key times Microsoft did face some stiff competition and actually churned out a better product than its competitor. Access was light years ahead of dBase, Visual Studio 4 killed Borland C++, Windows 95 was, truthfully, a better OS in a lot of ways than OS/2 (and that REALLY pissed me off, because I really did like Warp, but 95 had a better use of threads in its desktop process than OS/2 did, and OS/2 had its share of 16 bit code in its guts too). And yes, Netscape 3 and 4 were nowhere near as good as IE 4.0 was. People didn't bail on IE because it was bundled - they bundled because it had a fully programmable DOM and Netscape was only partially so... InnerHtml = trump card for MS back in the day.
It's easy to think that MS is terrible because, well, so many people that use MS products aren't that well trained in formal computer science. If I had a nickel for every time I heard a VB fan boy say "geez, MS is doing all of this hard stuff for me", after having had the "hard stuff" back in college in the 1980s, I would be pretty darned rich myself. But the fact of the matter is, you need to separate Windows from the vast majority of the people that use it, and if you do that, you'll find that there are some parts of it that are surprisingly elegant, well thought out, and reliable. More often than not, its the people using Windows that make it unreliable and retarded, and not the people that wrote it.
Eclipse is where Visual Studio was 5 years ago, and that count of years gets bigger with every successive release of Visual Studio. It just does. Sorry.
When Linux first came out, it was BETTER than Windows NT in a lot of ways, thanks to its unixy underpinnings. You could go on Slashdot and see Linux people slamming NT for not having things like remote desktop, ala X, file system problems, and any number of features."
But then, Windows 2000 came along, and then XP, and one by one, most of Unix's original beefs with Windows have been evaporated, and meanwhile, little of what Windows does has been replicated on Linux. Now Linux people slam Windows because of softer arguments, like "Ballmer is evil and Linux is morally correct". And, MS even added symbolic links to Vista...
Maybe Republicans use a more professional corporation for web work that recognizes that Windows is better than Linux for web development.
I mean, come on, its 2007 and Linux keeps falling farther and farther behind in developmental tools. Sure KDevelop and the like aren't far behind where Visual C++ is, but that's only because MS has made a FoxPro out of it. These days, the action is in C# and right now Linux simply does not have an environment that can even compare to Visual C#. It just doesn't.
So, yes, I love Linux, but its largely because the platform is wide open and I can contribute to it, but, I'm not stupid enough to pretend that it's still 1995 and Unix is flat out better than Windows. It isn't any more. In many conceivable ways, ease of development, management, programmability, Windows is easier to use than Linux is. Windows Server is expensive, but it is a darned good operating system.
Sure, go for Linux, and the ideology and the history, but Republicans will have none of that in something as a critical as a campaign, and they will go with Windows. If you would have taken this poll 10 years ago, sure, Republicans would have all be hosting on Suns, I'm sure.
Woah! I learned to program on an Apple II! I like Apple and cheer the resurgence Jobs has brought to them. I think he's done a fantastic job with their products and I wish them continued success. When I say what I wrote about Mossberg, tis true, he is an Apple fanboy, but, hey, that ENDEARS him to me. It's not like there are not a lot of writers that are Windows shills.
Seriously, did anyone expect Mossberg to write anything else? He's been cheering Apple since before I can remember. I think he has the logo tatoo'd on his keaster!
I apologize in advance for the subsequent stream of obscenities, but I'm a lifelong Republican who feels eminently betrayed by his own party and the leaders of the conservative movement.
To start : Open the borders and make airports cool again. Tear down all the scanners and let people walk through the gates to see planes take off. Quit worrying that someone might blow up this or that and start focusing on making money. There are no terrorists hiding under your goddamn bed, so you can quit shitting in it every time you see the lights flicker. If you need big daddy government to make yourself feel safe, then you have no business calling yourself a Republican. Every Republican should stand up and demand that these pussies that co-opt our party be held to account. Conservatism is supposed to mean taking things in perspective, even in supposedly dire circumstances, with a confidence to handle your own affairs. There has been absolutely no perspective in this war, just overreaching knee jerk reactions like a woman burning down her house to get a mouse. Tell Anne Coulter that if she has to have this war on terror to feel safe, she ought to get back in the fucking kitchen and start making dinner like a good Republican dike is supposed to do.
The leaders of this conservative movement have completely failed, and I'm almost disgusted with myself that I even used to listen to the likes of Rush. "Oh, the terrorists are going to get us." Dude, I bench almost 300lbs. Bring that old f--- Bin Laden on, and I'll punch him in his fucked up kidney and that will be the end of him. Swagger, that's how you fight these people. Arrogant faith in freedom and delighting in our consumer lifestyle. This introspective, fearful war on terror is the most profoundly un-American response to any crisis that I have seen in my lifetime. Americans are not supposed to be afraid of anything, and here we are crying like a bunch of pansies because of some dude with a beard. Death! We all have to go. Get over it. If you believed in God as much as you said you do, you would not be afraid to die for freedom yourself, by the way, like you ask our soldiers to do.
I thought we already proved with the Cold War that backwards ideologies bring themselves down and that all we need to do is focus on making money to win. All of this crap that we hear about terrorists plotting this or that is the same shit we heard before about Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and more... (fill in the blank) secret agents are plotting to destroy the USA. Get off the Oxy, quit dreaming up conspiracies, and walk down the street confident that you can kick some terrorist ass or die trying if it comes down to it. I'd rather worry about the occasional arab that might look suspicious than every camera that surely is. I'm not afraid of no islamist, and neither should you be.
Ah, my Steam Car is going to go Mach 2 then! You'll see! Once I raise sufficient capital, I'll even fly you over for a good Kentucky Bourbon while you witness the awesome power of my ultimate battle station... oh wait, I'm building a steam car, not a death star. Well, maybe my steam car WILL be a death star!:-)
One of these days, I am going to get a bunch of spam from "YOUR IBM SUPERCOMPUTER OVERLORD", informing me that humanity has made a mess of things, and it has decided to run the world for our own good.
All of this obsession about control of one's product goes to show that today's conservatives are dead wrong.
Today's liberal media isn't liberal. It's a bunch of conservatives pushing a liberal product.
As much as they talk about socialism and the idea of shared property, they certainly don't live it. These people in the media business aren't liberals - not the firms, major artists, or even much of the talent. They only walk around with a few Mao bags to have some street credibility, but, at the end of the day, they are grubbing for every nickel they can get their hands on, as much as the fat necked guy that ran Exxon. Today's so called liberal media isn't liberal at all, just talks that way while secretly bitter that they don't have their own fleet of private jets, like the really rich people do.
Liberal media? I dare anyone to post copies of the Rolling Stone, Time, New York Times, online on your own web site. Liberal writers? You go write ahead and start a web site with the text of Alterman, Kos, and others. Liberal movies? Let's see what happens when someone torrents Michael Moore's latest movie. I guarantee you all of these so-called socially conscious types won't wait two seconds to have a DMCA lawywer after you!
Abbie Hoffman is rolling over in his grave! As a Republican, I may not agree with much of what he said, but at least he was a real liberal, and was genuinely refreshing.
Slashdot Mirror
That depends what product exactly you want to sell
What aren't you allowed to sell? Oh drugs? Which ones would you sell? Are you oppressed because you are not allowed to enrich yourself selling drugs to children? So, you basically aspire to be a drug dealer and you feel the government is oppressing you. I guess we see where you are coming from!
The only reason the government isn't stopping you from expressing yourself however you want is because you're too damn apathetic to express yourself in any way the government could ever care about. Try protesting, in public, at a place and time where it will actually be noticed even if the protest *doesn't* turn in to a riot.
Oh, so you think blocking up a bunch of traffic and disrupting businesses is speech. It's not, its a form of passive aggressive economic terrorism. Even so, you still can express yourself in that way, but those of us with a job to do have the equal right to express ourselves by kicking your ass or paying someone to do it for us. Speech is web sites, newspapers, media, books, and yes, you can write or film whatever you want.
gain, depends exactly what you're buying. Of course, being a good little consumer, I doubt you want to buy anything the government doesn't like anyway
I have a right to keep and bear arms. As such, I have two guns, and when I get money, I will get more. If I don't like the government that much, I'll go out and shoot someone, find some like minded individuals, and start a revolution. Thus, government is by the consent of the governed. But, even when the Democrats run it, government is actually doing pretty good, so, there's no need to join a revolution at the moment. You, on the other hand, won't do anything but whine.
is clearly a very important right(!)
It certainly is. Have a look at most of the trouble spots around the world and I'd be willing to bet that you find a lot of hungry people.
Dumbass.
The article laments that dogs killed a bunch of iguanas and a bunch of birds died because of tourism and fishing. Surely the birthplace of evolution can yield a dogproof iguana and a carproof bird. There are plenty of birds and who really likes lizards anyway. It's up to the people of the island to decide how to balance it, not you. If you want to save all those lizards, put them in your house.
How does the government really control all aspects of my life? Does the government stop me from any of the following:
a) starting a business
b) selling a product
c) changing jobs
d) expressing myself however I want
e) buying anything I want
f) eating however much I want, when I want, where I want
The answer is really no. The problem is, you people don't really know what a loss of freedom really is. There are countries around the world that actively block people from any of the above. In socialist regimes, there are no jobs, and strict prohibitions against entrepreneurship, so, a-c are out. In places like China, d is out. In others, a-c, e and f are out, because there isno economic activity due to either corruption or chronic war. In some places, like North Korea, all of the items are out.
Do I like the USA PATRIOT ACT? No, I don't. However, I've not seen the Democrats do anything to even try to repeal it.
But its not that I'm "apathetic", its that, you are spoiled, and you have no idea what you really have. Talk to someone from Viet Nam whose opened up his own business in America.
Those of us who are working stiffs with a wife and kids are too old and too occupied to give a shit about whatever Kos or Moveon or Rush says. We've been through all of the self indulgent political wars already and see it for what it is.
See, here's the thing. You think the average man should be outraged because of something you read from your political propaganda site. You read all this stuff, spoon fed to you designed so that you will at least give them your vote but more likely, just more money, and really, its no different from watching advertisements. Rush, Kos, Right, Left, all these guys are out there stoking whatever political fire they can invent so they can cash in on your civic mindedness. Protesting Carter, supporting Gary Hart, early horror and then staunch support for Reagan, the Culture Wars of the early 1990s, Clinton vs Gingrich, really, been there, done that, and every step along the way, there's been someone getting rich in the name of some cause, be it a liberal author or artist, or, a right wing radio host.
You just have to let it go and look at your life and assess how things are based on people around. I guarantee that 95% of your problems are yours, and not the governments, fault. Right now, taxes are pretty low, the economy is ok, and it really has been for the last 30 years, save for a few hiccups. Bottom line is that Reaganomics worked and socialism is largely discredited, and that's that. If you choose a life where you say you don't value money, don't come crying to your political masters 20 years down the road for not having any. IT's pretty cut and dry. You need to manage your life so that it is profitable, so that you can support the ones you love, including yourself. Even an issue like global warming really has no practical impact on most people. Even if the worst comes true, and sea levels rise 100 feet, most people will just move further inland and life will go on. Support politicians that support your causes, yes, but don't let it become your life! Instead of spending so much time worrying about what Dick Cheney or Hillary Clinton are doing, worry about your own life. Then, if you do run into a government law that genuinely has an immediate impact on you. If they raise taxes, or do something stupid and get the price of fuel up to $7 / gallon, then yes, riot. If interest rates hit 15-20%, then, yes, riot. If unemployment hits 20-40%, then yes, riot. But, the bottom line, is none of those things have happened. In the grand scheme of things, we're extremely fortunate to have what we have and the rest of the world only wishes they could have our petty troubles.
Enjoy your life, because you are lucky to be American.
Seriously, we could have any legally binding contract go into a public database on the internet, which could be viewed by anyone.
Seriously, if you have someone so stupid and so lacking in self discipline that they are willing to get some pussy or some cock, even if it kills them, then do you even want these people to breed? Come on, if someone can't even keep in their pants when faced with a possible shot at death, then, really, isn't it unreasonable assume that they are innately unreliable for everything else?
If you put a spaceship in front of any true geek, they'll sell out. It doesn't matter what the cause is. You give a geek enough money to build their own spaceship, or at least launch an unmanned probe to a place of their choosing, and get pictures, scientific and commercial data back, and they will sell out. Sure, advancing some quasi socialistic ideal is one thing, but, putting mankind into the stars is quite another. You just can't be a self respecting geek and not want a spaceship, or at least a cool submarine. I mean, come on!
He wrote that thing, Balance of Power, in a very classic game for Mac way long ago. Had simulated news events and a cool thing if you did screw up and trigger a nuclear war.
I guarantee that if I built a product, and wanted it closed source using GPL materials, and sold it for a ton of money, I could negotiate separate license deals with all of the copyright holders and hire some Indians to replace the code from those holders who wouldn't sign.
So, in a sense, this license doesn't really STOP someone from making money on software, as it does, discourages it.
I bet I could even buy the right from all of GNU for less than 10 billion dollars.
I have to admit that I am more than a bit put off by the excessive wording and length of this license.
I think if I put out free software, I'm going to put it into the public domain, and I would encourage people to do the same. The fixation on limiting other people's profits from your work because you choose to do so is absurd, and in the days where it only costs $20 a month to give away a fairly large amount of source code to a fairly large amount of people, the whole point of linking the publication of the source with the distribution of a derived work is largely obsolete.
The GPL is starting to shape up as something that redistributes rights more than actually creates new ones. Software developers publishing under the GPL essentially have to waive their patent rights, waive their copyrights, so that consumers will benefit from software. Seriously, why do you care if someone gets rich off of what you wrote for free? Honestly, I'd almost rather have that, knowing that what I did made someone something, rather than none at all. Somebody else's profits do not block you from anything, and trying to make other people not earn money and not close software seems more jealousy than any practical social concern.
The absolute freest you can make your software is public domain, because public domain doesn't take away someone else's right to do something with it, and the GPL does.
Moving to native quad core has a lot of advantages and I'm actually excited to see how well this CPU will perform. Critics that claim that AMD lags behind in the process size would do well to note that AMD has ALWAYS lagged behind Intel in that category, and, yet, has managed to not only survive, but prosper.
And let everyone else do IPv6?
I don't want anything that detracts from the anonymity of today's internet. I don't like spammers and online crooks, but, really, is it worth giving up fundamental liberties and crippling our right to be well, ourselves, in order to be protected from this supposedly nefarious set of villains out to get us?
Are you people that afraid, that sold on the corporate hype that you need to give up all of your rights in order to be safe? Maybe the first business of safety is to protect your rights!
Scooter Libby lied under oath, and the very same right wingers that wanted to impeach Clinton want to pardon Scooter Libby.
If you don't want to be in the union, go work at a non-union place. Ah, but the union jobs pay more - hmm, wonder why.
And I look forward to upgrading my 248s to 275s on my birthday.
Last 7 years? I'd say more like the last 30. What's been happening is a gradual escalation in political demagoguery since Reagan won in 1980s. Back then, the left went absolutely nuts and started throwing out all sorts of ridiculous charges. The right reciprocated when Clinton got elected by trying to impeach him essentially because he was a Democrat. The left, obviously ticked off, racheted up their assaults on the right to a high new level. These assaults are bleeding into lawmaking.
You saw Clinton go after the right by using the IRS to attack right wing think tanks. Then, Bush matched that by trying to get loser pays tort reform, a proposition which would bankrupt the plaintiff lawyers that drive the Democrats. And you see Republicans also proposing to allow members to opt out of union dues for political purposes, another union defunder and Democrat breaker. Now Democrats are trying to retaliate by going after right wing media - by basically banning free speech in radio.
The bottom line is, that anyone that thinks their guys, Democrat or Republican, is a fool, and anyone that goes onto a board and parrots the latest propaganda from the likes of MoveOn or National Review are even bigger fools, because they let themselves get used as puppets.
Distortions, flat out lies, go around on both sides, as if, it is settled that the truth can be sacrificed for the greater good of political victory. If you really want to take our country back, we need to realize that the people that are trying to whip up support for their own causes. People like Kos and Rush are in it to cash in, and gain personal power. They are damaged, all of these "talking heads", and they need more a good bullet to the head than to be taken as anything more as the demagoguing power mongering traitors to the American ideal that they are.
I think the internet, far from opening minds up, has driven everyone into their own little mental camps of religious orthodoxy, where people throw out claims without actually looking at things. I used to do this myself, when I was younger now. Now I am old and don't give a shit about some side or another winning. I just want to make some money and pay off all my massive credit card bills. Apple vs Atari, DOS vs CPM, Amiga vs PC, OS/2 vs Windows, BeOS vs Everybody... I've been a zealot for all of them...
As it is, Windows Server has quite a few strengths.
a) Good uptime. I use Windows Server at work and get year long uptimes.
b) Easy to add, remove, users and manage groups.
c) Good support for wireless networking.
d) Good API for graphics and file access.
e) Consistent APIs for sound and printing.
I'm not convinced that Linux wins all the time in security or in stability, in this day and age. Sure, in the days of Windows NT, absolutely, but since Windows 2000 the gap has narrowed significantly and I would not be at all surprised if, depending on the application, Windows Server can be more stable than Linux. I think to continue to say Linux is not as stable ignores that Windows has moved rather rapidly on its own, even though the gaps between major releases are long. Similarly, I would dispute the lower TCO as well. Both systems are complicated, and the biggest factor in TCO right now is going to be the level of training on both.
That's not to say that Linux doesn't have its strengths. Out of the box, C++ on 64 bit Linux is infinately better than C++ on 64 bit Windows. Visual Studio 2005 for C++ on 64 bits feels like crap, whereas KDevelop feels solid if a bit feature short - the intellisense is not particularly good, and the debugger does a horrible job with showing registers if you decide to switch to assembly view or step into assembly. However, Linux does tell time accurately, taking into good account the historical nature of time zones, whereas Windows makes no effort to do this at all. So, mktime(), or even its API underpinning LocalTimeToSystemTimeTZ (or whatever it is) on Windows will be wrong for a historical time, and on Linux it won't.
Do I want Linux to "win"? A part of me does, yes, as I'm investing more and more into learning it, and I've got three titles to be released over the next few months and a pretty cool idea for a forth. However, I'm not so silly as to buy into a religion that Linux is automatically better than Windows, as, despite all the hype to the contrary, at key times Microsoft did face some stiff competition and actually churned out a better product than its competitor. Access was light years ahead of dBase, Visual Studio 4 killed Borland C++, Windows 95 was, truthfully, a better OS in a lot of ways than OS/2 (and that REALLY pissed me off, because I really did like Warp, but 95 had a better use of threads in its desktop process than OS/2 did, and OS/2 had its share of 16 bit code in its guts too). And yes, Netscape 3 and 4 were nowhere near as good as IE 4.0 was. People didn't bail on IE because it was bundled - they bundled because it had a fully programmable DOM and Netscape was only partially so... InnerHtml = trump card for MS back in the day.
It's easy to think that MS is terrible because, well, so many people that use MS products aren't that well trained in formal computer science. If I had a nickel for every time I heard a VB fan boy say "geez, MS is doing all of this hard stuff for me", after having had the "hard stuff" back in college in the 1980s, I would be pretty darned rich myself. But the fact of the matter is, you need to separate Windows from the vast majority of the people that use it, and if you do that, you'll find that there are some parts of it that are surprisingly elegant, well thought out, and reliable. More often than not, its the people using Windows that make it unreliable and retarded, and not the people that wrote it.
Eclipse is where Visual Studio was 5 years ago, and that count of years gets bigger with every successive release of Visual Studio. It just does. Sorry.
When Linux first came out, it was BETTER than Windows NT in a lot of ways, thanks to its unixy underpinnings. You could go on Slashdot and see Linux people slamming NT for not having things like remote desktop, ala X, file system problems, and any number of features."
But then, Windows 2000 came along, and then XP, and one by one, most of Unix's original beefs with Windows have been evaporated, and meanwhile, little of what Windows does has been replicated on Linux. Now Linux people slam Windows because of softer arguments, like "Ballmer is evil and Linux is morally correct". And, MS even added symbolic links to Vista...
Maybe Republicans use a more professional corporation for web work that recognizes that Windows is better than Linux for web development.
I mean, come on, its 2007 and Linux keeps falling farther and farther behind in developmental tools. Sure KDevelop and the like aren't far behind where Visual C++ is, but that's only because MS has made a FoxPro out of it. These days, the action is in C# and right now Linux simply does not have an environment that can even compare to Visual C#. It just doesn't.
So, yes, I love Linux, but its largely because the platform is wide open and I can contribute to it, but, I'm not stupid enough to pretend that it's still 1995 and Unix is flat out better than Windows. It isn't any more. In many conceivable ways, ease of development, management, programmability, Windows is easier to use than Linux is. Windows Server is expensive, but it is a darned good operating system.
Sure, go for Linux, and the ideology and the history, but Republicans will have none of that in something as a critical as a campaign, and they will go with Windows. If you would have taken this poll 10 years ago, sure, Republicans would have all be hosting on Suns, I'm sure.
Every sentence you type in Democratic Linux invokes an automatic grammar checker which injects the opposite point of view.
Woah! I learned to program on an Apple II! I like Apple and cheer the resurgence Jobs has brought to them. I think he's done a fantastic job with their products and I wish them continued success. When I say what I wrote about Mossberg, tis true, he is an Apple fanboy, but, hey, that ENDEARS him to me. It's not like there are not a lot of writers that are Windows shills.
Seriously, did anyone expect Mossberg to write anything else? He's been cheering Apple since before I can remember. I think he has the logo tatoo'd on his keaster!
I apologize in advance for the subsequent stream of obscenities, but I'm a lifelong Republican who feels eminently betrayed by his own party and the leaders of the conservative movement.
To start : Open the borders and make airports cool again. Tear down all the scanners and let people walk through the gates to see planes take off. Quit worrying that someone might blow up this or that and start focusing on making money. There are no terrorists hiding under your goddamn bed, so you can quit shitting in it every time you see the lights flicker. If you need big daddy government to make yourself feel safe, then you have no business calling yourself a Republican. Every Republican should stand up and demand that these pussies that co-opt our party be held to account. Conservatism is supposed to mean taking things in perspective, even in supposedly dire circumstances, with a confidence to handle your own affairs. There has been absolutely no perspective in this war, just overreaching knee jerk reactions like a woman burning down her house to get a mouse. Tell Anne Coulter that if she has to have this war on terror to feel safe, she ought to get back in the fucking kitchen and start making dinner like a good Republican dike is supposed to do.
The leaders of this conservative movement have completely failed, and I'm almost disgusted with myself that I even used to listen to the likes of Rush. "Oh, the terrorists are going to get us." Dude, I bench almost 300lbs. Bring that old f--- Bin Laden on, and I'll punch him in his fucked up kidney and that will be the end of him. Swagger, that's how you fight these people. Arrogant faith in freedom and delighting in our consumer lifestyle. This introspective, fearful war on terror is the most profoundly un-American response to any crisis that I have seen in my lifetime. Americans are not supposed to be afraid of anything, and here we are crying like a bunch of pansies because of some dude with a beard. Death! We all have to go. Get over it. If you believed in God as much as you said you do, you would not be afraid to die for freedom yourself, by the way, like you ask our soldiers to do.
I thought we already proved with the Cold War that backwards ideologies bring themselves down and that all we need to do is focus on making money to win. All of this crap that we hear about terrorists plotting this or that is the same shit we heard before about Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and more... (fill in the blank) secret agents are plotting to destroy the USA. Get off the Oxy, quit dreaming up conspiracies, and walk down the street confident that you can kick some terrorist ass or die trying if it comes down to it. I'd rather worry about the occasional arab that might look suspicious than every camera that surely is. I'm not afraid of no islamist, and neither should you be.
Ah, my Steam Car is going to go Mach 2 then! You'll see! Once I raise sufficient capital, I'll even fly you over for a good Kentucky Bourbon while you witness the awesome power of my ultimate battle station... oh wait, I'm building a steam car, not a death star. Well, maybe my steam car WILL be a death star! :-)
One of these days, I am going to get a bunch of spam from "YOUR IBM SUPERCOMPUTER OVERLORD", informing me that humanity has made a mess of things, and it has decided to run the world for our own good.
All of this obsession about control of one's product goes to show that today's conservatives are dead wrong.
Today's liberal media isn't liberal. It's a bunch of conservatives pushing a liberal product.
As much as they talk about socialism and the idea of shared property, they certainly don't live it. These people in the media business aren't liberals - not the firms, major artists, or even much of the talent. They only walk around with a few Mao bags to have some street credibility, but, at the end of the day, they are grubbing for every nickel they can get their hands on, as much as the fat necked guy that ran Exxon. Today's so called liberal media isn't liberal at all, just talks that way while secretly bitter that they don't have their own fleet of private jets, like the really rich people do.
Liberal media? I dare anyone to post copies of the Rolling Stone, Time, New York Times, online on your own web site. Liberal writers? You go write ahead and start a web site with the text of Alterman, Kos, and others. Liberal movies? Let's see what happens when someone torrents Michael Moore's latest movie. I guarantee you all of these so-called socially conscious types won't wait two seconds to have a DMCA lawywer after you!
Abbie Hoffman is rolling over in his grave! As a Republican, I may not agree with much of what he said, but at least he was a real liberal, and was genuinely refreshing.
Steal this media! That's what he'd say.