"But David Dawes seems a little suspicious: "I have heard privately that some vendors were planning to move to an X.Org release even before this licence issue came up. That probably makes business sense for the vendors given that X.Org is a vendor-oriented organization sponsored by hardware and software companies, while XFree86 is an independent group of volunteer developers. I suspect that the licence issue may have affected the timing, but not the end result", he concluded. "
I'm not saying *I* feel this way, but I was wondering what people think about David Dawes' statement to the effect that the big Linux Vendors were already planning to jump to X.org, because the collection of vendors can push it in directions that make the companies happier. He hints that they used the license issue as an excuse to wag the dog, and we users have been duped.
Did you notice #s 6 and 7 on thier "channel 9 doctrine"?
6. Don't shock the system. Lasting change only happens in baby steps. 7. Know when to turn the mic off. There are some topics which will only result in problems when you discuss them. This has nothing to do with censorship, but with working within the reality of the system that exists in our world today. You will not change anything by taking on legal or financial issues, you will only shock the system, spook the passengers, and create a negative situation.
I'm reading these people's posts, and... I know that slashdotters can be pretty dumb, and many of us are the type to get wedgies in high school, but we don't project a face that's that lame, do we? Geeks without the rebel in them are just... dorks.
Even our windows supporters are way more hardcore than those dweebs.
Looks like Sun might have gone from "Teetering on irrelevancy" to "Embraced, Extended and Extinguished." At least they got some cash to cushion the golden parachutes.
Ok, one more time: Obscurity does not create security. Assume the crackers already know the vulnerabilities. This is to allow the "white hats" to defend themselves.
Going from rh (7.2-9.0) to fc1 is just an apt-get dist-upgrade away.
Here's instructions to do it with yum, I did it just this week with apt (faster, in my opinion.) You should not have to reinstall anything (as long as you stick to rpms), and your home directory will be completely left alone, for the most part.
Not that different, really, It's all pretty messed up, including our lying, incompetent, barely literate president. I wish the president would speak his own words - then we'd see how useless and cruel he really is.
Like I said, it's all screwed up, and in a big way because the journalists - the people who were given the first amendment to keep up honest - are being taught how to lie professionally.
A quote is a quote. Not something you made up and "ran past" the speaker for attribution rights. If you don't understand that a) lying is wrong and b) two wrongs don't make a right, then your parents suck. But no more than the parents of most people.
The problem is... if *you* write it, then it's *not* a quote, and can't be attributed to another person. If you write it, then it's your opinion. Attributing it to another person is lying and probably fraud.
OK, I was addressing the rights that allow free people to undertake endeavors, namely those of building a tool for fun.
Nothing, as far as I know, gives anyone the right to play a game in violation of cpyright. This still has nothing to do with the conversation, other than in a few confused minds, including the original poster of this application and Blizzard/Vivendi's lawyers.
As you pointed out, I probably shouldn't have bothered responding, since I answered the wrong question, about the rights of the individual to make bnetd, not the rights of the individual to violate copyright, which I don't agree with.
You can't, and neither can the broadcasters. Fining them doesn't make them try to be more consistent, it makes them try to be more tame.
Consistency requires you to provide feedback to your affiliate, not for the government to assume control of the airwaves.
If a channel doesn't maintain consistency and won't play things you like (ie, it's busy playing things that OTHER PEOPLE like) then change the fucking channel.
No one is forcing anyone else's kids to experience anything. Change the fucking channel. Turn off the TV. That's what all of this is about. America is a free speech nation. If you choose to shelter your children by tramping on the rights of others, then change the fucking channel, or move elsewhere.
Following your logic, we should eliminate "boring" stuff, too - since after all, it's your airwaves, too - you shouldn't be forces to watch stuff you don't enjoy. What next, do you want to prevent forcing of people's children to watch black people on tv, to prevent cultural confusion? Eliminate gay themes, because it doesn't apply to you?
The point you are all missing is that what YOU find offensive is different from what everyone ELSE finds offensive, and if we give in to you, then we have to give in to the KKK, the skinheads, the christians - all the hate groups... everyone is offended by something. Do you want the government to be responsible for deciding what content you are allowed to watch?
This is a bigger issue than your poor ears hearing potty mouth words. Just change the fucking channel. Much like food poisoning, swear words don't hurt anyone, except people who haven't been exposed to them enough.
Censorship, on the other hand, is the first and most important step in preventing the people from governing themselves. It's so important that our founding fathers made it the very first amendment.
What does playing Starcraft without paying for it have to do with this? Once again, Bnetd was a tool that let people play games - legal or illegal had nothing to do with it, that was a personal decision made by the player. Bnetd is agnostic when it comes to Blizzard's business model.
Blizzard should have gone after the people trafficking in copyright violations, not the people who were just building a game server.
Change the channel, asshole. You can feel free to listen without being offended - I do.
If you and your grandmother aren't mature enough to pull it off, then change the fucking channel, you candyass.
Of course it doens't harm you to show respect. It harms *everyone* when you criminalize having a contrary opinion. Guess what, dipshit? Bono doesn't consider the word "fuck" to be obscene. Neither do I. Who gets to decide what decent is? You, you cockknocker?
Are you the kind of schmuck who passes a town resolution forcing your neighbor to fence in his pool, or are are you kind of person who teaches your kids to swim? Remember, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE ANOTHER POOL.
Exposing your kids to things is healthy for them, and explaining how you feel about them is how you help them form thier moral compasses. Trying to hide the real world from them does nothing more than make them think you are controlling and stupid. Either they already know about what you'r ehiding, and enjoying it when you're not there, or you're making them unprepared for when they do encounter it in the real world.
It's not cute, nor a cop out. Change the channel, motherfucker.
"people like you" fuck you , pal. You don't know me, and I can assure you I'm a lot harder to pigeonhole than you are, you censoring ass. You should eb ashamed of that name - you certainly aren't standing for freedom today.
We have freedom of speech in this country - it's the VERY FIRST AMENDMENT. You on the other hand, have the freedom to not listen, and to tell your kids not to listen, until they reach the age of consent.
Fuck decency - it's a nebulous concept and it changes depending on who is using the word. I personally think Christianity is indecent, and discussing it in public should be outlawed. I think sex is great, and it should be less censored. Less sexual repression will lead to less sexual abuse.
How do you reconcile the fact that everyone's vision of what "decency" is is different?
The FCC was created because a group of people forgot what the founding principles of this nation were, and decided to legalize censorship. I hope that all this bullshit they're pulling finally gets them eliminated.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the actual quote from The Inquirer:
"But David Dawes seems a little suspicious: "I have heard privately that some vendors were planning to move to an X.Org release even before this licence issue came up. That probably makes business sense for the vendors given that X.Org is a vendor-oriented organization sponsored by hardware and software companies, while XFree86 is an independent group of volunteer developers. I suspect that the licence issue may have affected the timing, but not the end result", he concluded. "
I'm not saying *I* feel this way, but I was wondering what people think about David Dawes' statement to the effect that the big Linux Vendors were already planning to jump to X.org, because the collection of vendors can push it in directions that make the companies happier. He hints that they used the license issue as an excuse to wag the dog, and we users have been duped.
Your business law teacher *may* have forgotten the corollary to that rule: ...unless you are against IBM.
Did you notice #s 6 and 7 on thier "channel 9 doctrine"?
6. Don't shock the system. Lasting change only happens in baby steps.
7. Know when to turn the mic off. There are some topics which will only result in problems when you discuss them. This has nothing to do with censorship, but with working within the reality of the system that exists in our world today. You will not change anything by taking on legal or financial issues, you will only shock the system, spook the passengers, and create a negative situation.
I'm reading these people's posts, and ... I know that slashdotters can be pretty dumb, and many of us are the type to get wedgies in high school, but we don't project a face that's that lame, do we? Geeks without the rebel in them are just ... dorks.
Even our windows supporters are way more hardcore than those dweebs.
I bet your kids suck.
Looks like Sun might have gone from "Teetering on irrelevancy" to "Embraced, Extended and Extinguished." At least they got some cash to cushion the golden parachutes.
Ok, one more time: Obscurity does not create security. Assume the crackers already know the vulnerabilities. This is to allow the "white hats" to defend themselves.
You're aware that Google really does make a klingon interface available, right?
tomorrow already?
Going from rh (7.2-9.0) to fc1 is just an apt-get dist-upgrade away.
Here's instructions to do it with yum, I did it just this week with apt (faster, in my opinion.) You should not have to reinstall anything (as long as you stick to rpms), and your home directory will be completely left alone, for the most part.
Upgrading from RedHat 8/9 to Fedora Core 1
Also #fedora on freenode is your friend.
Not that different, really, It's all pretty messed up, including our lying, incompetent, barely literate president. I wish the president would speak his own words - then we'd see how useless and cruel he really is.
Like I said, it's all screwed up, and in a big way because the journalists - the people who were given the first amendment to keep up honest - are being taught how to lie professionally.
A quote is a quote. Not something you made up and "ran past" the speaker for attribution rights. If you don't understand that a) lying is wrong and b) two wrongs don't make a right, then your parents suck. But no more than the parents of most people.
This is probably why so many journalists are scum, because they are taught it is proper to lie.
I suppose you are looking at a corrupt, legal defintion, where as I'm looking at the defintion of the word fraud itself...
It's unethical because when you quote somebody, it indicates they are the ones who expressed the content, and you are simply reporting it.
When a vendor places words in a customer's mouth, then the piece is misleading and fraudulent.
The problem is ... if *you* write it, then it's *not* a quote, and can't be attributed to another person. If you write it, then it's your opinion. Attributing it to another person is lying and probably fraud.
After all, as everyone should know - jabbing a bull with a fork just gets you crushed.
OK, I was addressing the rights that allow free people to undertake endeavors, namely those of building a tool for fun.
Nothing, as far as I know, gives anyone the right to play a game in violation of cpyright. This still has nothing to do with the conversation, other than in a few confused minds, including the original poster of this application and Blizzard/Vivendi's lawyers.
As you pointed out, I probably shouldn't have bothered responding, since I answered the wrong question, about the rights of the individual to make bnetd, not the rights of the individual to violate copyright, which I don't agree with.
It's a shame because I spent quite a while on it.
You can't, and neither can the broadcasters. Fining them doesn't make them try to be more consistent, it makes them try to be more tame.
Consistency requires you to provide feedback to your affiliate, not for the government to assume control of the airwaves.
If a channel doesn't maintain consistency and won't play things you like (ie, it's busy playing things that OTHER PEOPLE like) then change the fucking channel.
No one is forcing anyone else's kids to experience anything. Change the fucking channel. Turn off the TV. That's what all of this is about. America is a free speech nation. If you choose to shelter your children by tramping on the rights of others, then change the fucking channel, or move elsewhere.
... everyone is offended by something. Do you want the government to be responsible for deciding what content you are allowed to watch?
Following your logic, we should eliminate "boring" stuff, too - since after all, it's your airwaves, too - you shouldn't be forces to watch stuff you don't enjoy. What next, do you want to prevent forcing of people's children to watch black people on tv, to prevent cultural confusion? Eliminate gay themes, because it doesn't apply to you?
The point you are all missing is that what YOU find offensive is different from what everyone ELSE finds offensive, and if we give in to you, then we have to give in to the KKK, the skinheads, the christians - all the hate groups
This is a bigger issue than your poor ears hearing potty mouth words. Just change the fucking channel. Much like food poisoning, swear words don't hurt anyone, except people who haven't been exposed to them enough.
Censorship, on the other hand, is the first and most important step in preventing the people from governing themselves. It's so important that our founding fathers made it the very first amendment.
What does playing Starcraft without paying for it have to do with this? Once again, Bnetd was a tool that let people play games - legal or illegal had nothing to do with it, that was a personal decision made by the player. Bnetd is agnostic when it comes to Blizzard's business model.
Blizzard should have gone after the people trafficking in copyright violations, not the people who were just building a game server.
Nah, the breadth and scope of the bloodless coup from 2000 is just finally revealing itself:
Control the military.
Control the airwaves.
Breed fear into the public, use it to control thier spending habits and tax them unmercifully.
WW3 will be interesting - when the rest of the world shows up and kicks our asses because we invaded canada...
Change the channel, asshole. You can feel free to listen without being offended - I do.
If you and your grandmother aren't mature enough to pull it off, then change the fucking channel, you candyass.
Of course it doens't harm you to show respect. It harms *everyone* when you criminalize having a contrary opinion. Guess what, dipshit? Bono doesn't consider the word "fuck" to be obscene. Neither do I. Who gets to decide what decent is? You, you cockknocker?
You know the amazing part? Little kid X didn't die as a result, either.
Are you the kind of schmuck who passes a town resolution forcing your neighbor to fence in his pool, or are are you kind of person who teaches your kids to swim? Remember, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE ANOTHER POOL.
Exposing your kids to things is healthy for them, and explaining how you feel about them is how you help them form thier moral compasses. Trying to hide the real world from them does nothing more than make them think you are controlling and stupid. Either they already know about what you'r ehiding, and enjoying it when you're not there, or you're making them unprepared for when they do encounter it in the real world.
It's not cute, nor a cop out. Change the channel, motherfucker.
"people like you" fuck you , pal. You don't know me, and I can assure you I'm a lot harder to pigeonhole than you are, you censoring ass. You should eb ashamed of that name - you certainly aren't standing for freedom today.
We have freedom of speech in this country - it's the VERY FIRST AMENDMENT. You on the other hand, have the freedom to not listen, and to tell your kids not to listen, until they reach the age of consent.
Fuck decency - it's a nebulous concept and it changes depending on who is using the word. I personally think Christianity is indecent, and discussing it in public should be outlawed. I think sex is great, and it should be less censored. Less sexual repression will lead to less sexual abuse.
How do you reconcile the fact that everyone's vision of what "decency" is is different?
The FCC was created because a group of people forgot what the founding principles of this nation were, and decided to legalize censorship. I hope that all this bullshit they're pulling finally gets them eliminated.