I have a private Concorde that I've been flying east for 3 years now. I get 761 days in my year. Of course, I pity my friend who is flying west - he gets 22 backward days in his.
You may disagree with Google Street View or Google owning all your private data but what they did in China is NOT evil. Their only other choice was to discontinue business in China entirely, which would have been even worse than offering a censored search engine.
Noscript isn't the optimal example - the functionality is quite trivial, it's sole purpose is to remove features, not add them. Now imagine the same thing but with a more complex piece of software that take more than a week or a month to write - like Windows. How far along are we in making a replacement for it that's good for everybody?
You need to do a bit more research on which computers are more compatible with linux. The ones that are sold with ubuntu (eg. system76) should be the best. There's nothing wrong with not supporting all the hardware - Mac OS only works with Apple computers (and hackintoshes).
Which are completely useless to the vast majority of people.
Not directly, but there are some tangible indirect benefits to the software being free. Consider the Noscript/Adblock debacle. The Noscript author decided to make Noscript interfere with ad blocking for the author's ads. The community really did not like this and the Noscript author apologized and removed this feature. Now imagine what would have happened if he didn't. Someone would have forked Noscript and started up his own addon without this feature. Some people would have switched over to this other addon and the Noscript author would see his ad revenue rapidly declining and would finally give in (or die). This is only possible because Noscript is free software. If Noscript was proprietary, people would have been stuck with the author's shady practices until some guy comes up with a (bad) free software replacement.
The four freedoms don't just give you the right to edit the source, they give everyone the right to do so, benefitting you either directly (more options) or indirectly (deterrence from including evil features).
I don't like MS Office or the free software alternatives - I find it much simpler to use plain text for simple communication and LaTeX for presentation.
So if you're distributing files to others over a P2P network, you're giving them something, so it's negative theft, so you should have to pay... negative damages? I see where this is going...
"You have the right not to use it" is an argument against regulation. It is not an argument against consumer outrage. DRM takes control of your property which is why you should not buy games that have it.
sofar wrote:
>>mrcaseyj wrote:
>>>
>>>> C3ntaur wrote:
>>>> I invite anyone who claims CO2 is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes.
>>
>>> I invite anyone who claims pure water is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes.
>
>> I invite anyone who claims pure oxygen is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes
> I invite anyone who claims pure vacuum is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes.
I think nested quotes are a pollutant and would most definitely not want to sit in a room full of them for 10 minutes.
Now this is something I don't understand. How do these jokes cause any harm to Reiser's wife's children or family? Every time someone makes a joke about something that, for some reason, "shouldn't be taken lightly", there are people expressing their outrage about how it was wrong to make it. Everything is offensive to someone, we should all realize that being offended doesn't harm you in any way and you can just skip over to the next comment and let people who want to laugh about something do so.
It doesn't matter what you or I think about software patents. What matters is that TomTom thought Microsoft's use of their patents was harming them and that their use of Microsoft's patents was not harming Microsoft, or perhaps TomTom saw a chance to get some quick money. Take your pick.
The purpose of notification is to make sure that, as far as law is concerned, the infringing party infringes knowingly
Or maybe you see someone unintentionally harming you and you want to give them a chance to change their ways. Not everything is about money-grubbing lawsuits.
The thing with hating lawyers is that they're like soldiers - you worship the ones on your side but we all know that the world would be better off if no one had any.
Slashdot Mirror
so I cannot post some scary cyrillic sentence to puzzle you all.
Tb MOXEWb |/|C|'|O/\b3OBATb AH|"/\|/||/|CK|/|E 6YKBbl
See, leetspeak is very useful, especially in Russian.
You... don't know the 10th power of 2??? Hand in your geek card immediately.
I have a private Concorde that I've been flying east for 3 years now. I get 761 days in my year. Of course, I pity my friend who is flying west - he gets 22 backward days in his.
It is. Doing no evil at all is statistically impossible - even a butterfly flapping its wings causes (and dissipates) hurricanes years down the line.
You may disagree with Google Street View or Google owning all your private data but what they did in China is NOT evil. Their only other choice was to discontinue business in China entirely, which would have been even worse than offering a censored search engine.
Most ads are pay-per-click, so you're already freeloading by not clicking on them.
Yeah, the GP definitely has a 0th day posting vulnerability.
Noscript isn't the optimal example - the functionality is quite trivial, it's sole purpose is to remove features, not add them. Now imagine the same thing but with a more complex piece of software that take more than a week or a month to write - like Windows. How far along are we in making a replacement for it that's good for everybody?
I do not understand at all how you made the leap from the author's shady practices to libertarianism. And how does Noscript "steal bandwidth"?
It's a lot harder than a fork. Lots of Windows users are unhappy and look where we are in terms of creating a replacement.
You need to do a bit more research on which computers are more compatible with linux. The ones that are sold with ubuntu (eg. system76) should be the best. There's nothing wrong with not supporting all the hardware - Mac OS only works with Apple computers (and hackintoshes).
Which are completely useless to the vast majority of people.
Not directly, but there are some tangible indirect benefits to the software being free. Consider the Noscript/Adblock debacle. The Noscript author decided to make Noscript interfere with ad blocking for the author's ads. The community really did not like this and the Noscript author apologized and removed this feature. Now imagine what would have happened if he didn't. Someone would have forked Noscript and started up his own addon without this feature. Some people would have switched over to this other addon and the Noscript author would see his ad revenue rapidly declining and would finally give in (or die). This is only possible because Noscript is free software. If Noscript was proprietary, people would have been stuck with the author's shady practices until some guy comes up with a (bad) free software replacement.
The four freedoms don't just give you the right to edit the source, they give everyone the right to do so, benefitting you either directly (more options) or indirectly (deterrence from including evil features).
I don't like MS Office or the free software alternatives - I find it much simpler to use plain text for simple communication and LaTeX for presentation.
Buy a $30 hardcover book. Be kind to the copyright holder and burn it when you're done.
Does not compute. Need a copyright analogy.
So if you're distributing files to others over a P2P network, you're giving them something, so it's negative theft, so you should have to pay... negative damages? I see where this is going...
"You have the right not to use it" is an argument against regulation. It is not an argument against consumer outrage. DRM takes control of your property which is why you should not buy games that have it.
If I was robbing someone I would yell "police" to get him not to resist. If it was a major robbery I would grab a fake uniform and dress up too.
sofar wrote:
>>mrcaseyj wrote:
>>>
>>>> C3ntaur wrote:
>>>> I invite anyone who claims CO2 is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes.
>>
>>> I invite anyone who claims pure water is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes.
>
>> I invite anyone who claims pure oxygen is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes
> I invite anyone who claims pure vacuum is not a pollutant to sit in a room full of it for 10 minutes.
I think nested quotes are a pollutant and would most definitely not want to sit in a room full of them for 10 minutes.
Now this is something I don't understand. How do these jokes cause any harm to Reiser's wife's children or family? Every time someone makes a joke about something that, for some reason, "shouldn't be taken lightly", there are people expressing their outrage about how it was wrong to make it. Everything is offensive to someone, we should all realize that being offended doesn't harm you in any way and you can just skip over to the next comment and let people who want to laugh about something do so.
It doesn't matter what you or I think about software patents. What matters is that TomTom thought Microsoft's use of their patents was harming them and that their use of Microsoft's patents was not harming Microsoft, or perhaps TomTom saw a chance to get some quick money. Take your pick.
The purpose of notification is to make sure that, as far as law is concerned, the infringing party infringes knowingly
Or maybe you see someone unintentionally harming you and you want to give them a chance to change their ways. Not everything is about money-grubbing lawsuits.
Wait, mod point martyrdom finally backfired for once? Send out the fireworks!
The thing with hating lawyers is that they're like soldiers - you worship the ones on your side but we all know that the world would be better off if no one had any.
Steganography? As for how you would implement it, manufacture thousands of cheap dummy floating communicators and put them in the sea?