Re:This is no longer the case with me.
on
Interface Zen
·
· Score: 2
If you still have your old keyboard that you used with your XT, get it out of the garage and use it.
Look out though, some XT era keyboards, while using the same DIN-5 connector are not exactly signal compatible with newer machines. Some do have an "AT/XT" switch though. And some XT keyboard (particularly some of the original IBM ones with the dinky shift and return keycaps) are even more heinous than the current cheapo keyboards.
You've got a right to your opinion, but I will stick to mine.
You can't do the automation and development and integration of MSOffice, with SO or WP-Suite. Really.
How much do you actually know about PerfectOffice? WordPerfect had automation features way back in the MS-DOS days. StarOffice includes something called StarBasic. I think that the integration, development and automation features of the other products are not only not as bad as you might think, they are probably good enough for most people, especially since I think you overestimate the number of people who actually use them.
The (abused) Macro / VB implementation was a god-send.
Uh, whatever. Macro viruses are enough of a scourge that it almost outweighs any usefulness a macro facility might have. As for VB, all I can say is yuck.
That "95%" don't do anything other than type a letter is just your opinion.
True enough, there is really no way to get an exact figure. However, I personally think that I am being generous with the 95% figure given what I see in the typical office environment. I see lots of people using MS-Word who don't even use the paragraph styles, bulleting, etc. features correctly (I see lots of documents where people have inserted bullets manually or even use 'o' for bullets and fill them in with a marker.
Even my mother managed to set up Word so that it took some figures from an XL spread sheet once per week, and put them into a Word report.
Just because your mother is one of the 5%, doesn't mean that the number of people at that level is as big as you might suggest.
Sure, MS products are bloated, becuase of the way the programming is done at MS, and sure, they are massively over priced. But many (more than that "5%") do need some, or many, of the features...
You still aren't really giving me any real examples of features that are missing You got a "3" score because you were anti-MS,
Perhaps. Or maybe because the moderator thought I did a better job of presenting my argument.
I stayed firmly at "1" because I dared to say that something (while not good) wasn't bad.
Or maybe because you really didn't add anything constructive to the discussion, like some solid examples.
Sometimes, Slashdot really sucks.
If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. You can help make Slashdot better. Being bitter because you didn't get moderated the way you would like isn't going to do any good. Slashdot is really what the users make it.
P.S. I'm running WM inside eXceed from Win98 - becuase it's the best soloution for me, not becuase I need to grow up and stop hating MS.
I don't really hate MS. I hate some of the things that they do. If they would grow up and learn to play nicely with others, then I wouldn't feel a need to criticize them.
I'm having a bad day already:(
That is too bad, but you don't have to take it out on the rest of us.
No thanks, even if it ran on Linux, StarOffice is still much cheaper than MS-Works.
Or simply use Wordpad.
Again, it doesn't run under Linux, and there are plenty of free alternatives with similar or better feature sets. Also Wordpad doesn't include a spreadsheet or the other tools in something like StarOffice.
That isn't what I was saying. What I should have said was that 95% of the people I know use less than 50% of the functionality of MS-Office, therefore it is overkill for most people.
At any rate, the important thing is that the developers of StarOffice and WordPerfect Suite could do a better job of improving their product if people like you would just tell them some specific functionality items you want rather than vague, unspecific gripes.
Do you guys consider yourselves part of that 90%, or are you the 10% that always wants more more more
I don't want gratuitous features (bloat), better functionality is more important than more functionality (and there is a difference -- something Microsoft doesn't seem to grasp). More stability is indeed good, but not something that seems to be a problem with the Linux kernel.
I personally don't have much of a need for Wine (because I don't have a commitment to legacy Windows API apps or developing for Windows), but I recognize its importance to other people. Corel, the makers of WordPerfect, not Microsoft have been the ones helping with Wine. If Microsoft wants to help with Wine, they are free to do so, but I will be shocked if that ever happens because protecting their monopoly seems to be more important to them than growing the acceptance of Win32.
Re:You'd better run-- you'd better take cover...
on
Profiling A Nation
·
· Score: 2
I guess that I am not like most/.ers then. I was born before 1970.
There have also been rumors that Red Hat may try to buy out SCO. I never took them that seriously, because I don't think SCO's corporate culture is OpenSource compatible and I don't think that SCO has all that much to offer to Red Hat, but it could be possible. Probably the biggest obstacle would be the chunks of SCO owned by the Michels', Microsoft, and Novell.
What feature do you want in StarOffice or WordPerfect suite that isn't there? Frankly for probably 95% of the people I know, they are more than feature packed enough. I keep hearing complaints that StarOffice or WordPerfect aren't full featured enough, but I never hear anyone give any details as to what they think is missing. MS-Office is just plain bloated overkill for most people, and too expensive to boot ($169 for the upgrade version of MS-Office versus $99 for WordPerfect Suite outright was the advertised CompUSA price in the paper this weekend).
Basically I think that SGI looks at releasing Linux versions of their apps as a way to create interest in their products, and then hopes that people who like stuff like Iris Performer on Linux will buy SGI hardware or other software in the future.
I remember playing with earlier versions of this software under IRIX a couple of years ago, and it was pretty impressive. I will definitely have to download a copy of this to play with under Linux.
Eh? Since when? I've never needed to show a license to buy a car. Not even a new one from a dealer. Certainly not a used one from a (new/used) dealer. Certainly not a used one from a (small independant) dealer. Certainly not in a private transaction between two individuals (like if I see an add in the newspaper classifieds). Hell, you don't even need to show a driver's license to register a car where I live, in fact I've known people who didn't have a driver's license (like a person I know who is legally blind and can't get a driver's license) to be able to register a car and get plates (they owned the car, but paid someone else to drive them around).
Your idea of requiring a license to buy a computer is completely ridiculous, and I hope it was either intended to be ironic or was a weak attempt at humor.
If this sort of crazy scheme actually takes off (hopefully it will get buried where the sun doesn't shine), then it will be time to fork the net. A slightly less drastic measure is to build a network of anonymizing remailers and proxies interconnected by VPNs, so we can build a net on top of the net.
At any rate, this proposal goes way beyond the licensing of cars, since it is something that will be checked every time a person surfs. Car license plates are only checked if and when a police officer happens to think he has reason to do so. Hell, I have neglected to put the little registration stickers on the plates of one of my cars for several years and have never been questioned (the stickers are in the glove box I think, I just never got around to cleaning off the plates so they would stick). And as for the driver, he doesn't even need to show his drivers license unless he is stopped, and even then, the police will often give you 24 hours to prove you have a license if you claim to have forgotten it (of course if you look suspicious, they will probably search you, and your car and run you in to the police station).
On another level, if we require unforgeable certificates (which of course, there is no such thing, especially given the incredible lack of security on the Windows machines and Macs most people surf the net with), it will be going way beyond what we have for the postal system and the telephone system. Anyone who has pocket change can anonymously call anyone they want by using a pay telephone, and you can buy a prepaid long-distance phone card with cash at any Wal-Mart, which will even allow you to call internationally. If you use such a card at a payphone, you are about as anonymous as you can get. As for the postal system, anyone can buy stamps with cash and drop a letter into a post box anonymously. It isn't too difficult to mail even a large package without ever having to show any kind of ID (grocery store mail counters are good for that), despite laws enacted because of the Unibomber which are supposed to make that more difficult.
Any way I look at it, I don't see a 'real world' that is much more 'safe' than the net is, nor do I see what good any kind of restrictions are going to do. People will always find a way to circumvent them, and the stupid will still get caught if they don't circumvent them correctly.
Re:An applicable Robert Heinlein mis-quote
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 2
Unfortunately, in most parts of the US, if you are walking down the street and a cop decides you look like someone who he would like to harrass (say you happen to have long hair, be black or hispanic, or are wearing a 2600 T-shirt or some other sign that you are some kind of evil person) and you happen not to have any ID on you and refuse to answer any questions (and you look like you are old enough to drive -- kids can usually get away without having any ID), see how fast you get dragged down to the police station, frisked, handcuffed, fingerprinted, photographed, etc. You'll likely get some kind of bullshit story like you vaguely match the description of someone they are looking for. Of course if pressed, they won't have any documentation of that, but hey, it is your responsibility to prove you are innocent, not their responsibility to prove your guilt.
And unfortunately, from what I've seen, it isn't any better in any other country. It seems to be if you have the bad luck to find some ignorant redneck overzealous cop that is having a bad day, you might as well forget having civil rights. Fortunately, not all cops are like that, but it only takes one really bad one to really ruin your day.
Perhaps the NRA should push for the Swiss solution of every male between 18-60 *must* own a working firearm and must do a year (or is it 2?) of national service training.
Interestingly, it certainly seems to work for the Swiss. They have one of the lowest crime rates in Europe. I've been to Switzerland, and I have to say that the Swiss are very nice, polite people. Its an often overlooked example of widespread access to firearms not necessarily causing any sort of social ills.
Frankly, people like to blame guns for the level of violent crime in the US, and it doesn't wash. The US has higher levels of non-gun violent crime than most of the rest of the world too. However, it is worth noting that violent crime in the US is generally in decline despite the fact that most of the gun control laws on the books are nuisance measures, and the fact that the government has done an absolutely pathetic job of enforcing the laws already on the books. Interestingly, the violent crime rates in Australia and the UK are rising, including their gun related crime, despite near total prohibition of firearms ownership.
I'll repeat that one, because lots of Americans seem to have trouble with it: You Don't Need A Gun To Have Rights In A Democracy.
Well, your example of Australia doesn't seem to be supporting your argument lately. I think we'll keep our guns over here in the US, thanks.
If you are living in a democracy, then nothing and no one can ever take your democratic rights away.
That is completely niave. There are lots of ways a democracy could crumble, both from internal and external reasons. Although everyone hopes it will never be necessary, it seems best to have some insurance in the long run.
Take your pick: either you need guns, the US isn't a genuine Democracy and your 2nd Amendment is the foundation of your Civil Rights
We need guns, the US isn't a pure democracy (it is a republic, technically), and the 2nd Amendment is part of the bill of rights, and it along with the Consitution are certainly a foundation of our civil rights.
Law enforcement officers in the NRA? Sureyou jest!
Surely I don't jest. The NRA is a big supporter of law enforcement, as long as they act within the law, the constitution and the bill of rights. The NRA doesn't speak out against law enforcement, only against excesses comitted by law enforcement agencies or individuals. It is a gross mischaracterization by the media that the NRA is anti law enforcement or that the rank and file of law enforcement agencies are opposed to the NRA.
I occasionally go to gun shows in my area. A good example is that the NRA booth is usually manned by at least one uniformed local police officer.
Don't you recall the fund raising letter a while back where the NRA pontificated against "jack-booted government thugs"?
Have you ever seen the video footage of the Waco incident? Tell me what those BATF agents had on their feet. Many law enforcement officers I have talked to hold about the same opinions about the federal agencies (specifically the BATF, FBI and DEA) as I do. I think they are way out of control and need to be brought into line, and a vast number of the rank-and-file law enforcement officers out there do too.
You remember, the letter that made George Bush publicly denounce the NRA?
Uh, and you are saying this is necessarily a bad thing? George Bush, while better than Clinton, wasn't exactly a great friend of freedom.
That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. Many of us disagree. Frankly I just don't buy your arguments, and if you can't depend at all on the morals of people, then this is truly a more sad world than I think it is, and I consider myself somewhat of a pessimistic skeptic.
The fact that a few turncoats will sometimes act against their own countrymen isn't a good indication that organized military can always easily crush armed civilian guerillas. I think that even your example of the Vichy French collaborators that most French people supported the underground and opposed Hitler. Ultimately, Hitler lost the war, albiet the role the French resistance played in that is debatable. If you've ever heard of the "Guide Lamp Company" and their product "The Liberator", you'd understand how much value the US government saw in arming the French populous against the Nazis.
I'm not sure why your company would want to move to Oracle.
They are doing it in the name of 'standardization'. That is what corporate uses, so that is what we have to move to. We are just one division in a huge company (about 13% or so of the employees of the whole corp). Some of our other divisions are using DB2 or Informix and they will probably have to change to Oracle as well.
Sybase on Linux rocks. Of course Sybase doesn't have the scalability or options that Oracle does, but for mid-ranged databases and even small enterprise databases Sybase can't be beat.
We have everything from tiny databases to huge enterprise databases, so scalability and wide platform level support (Solaris, AIX, HP/UX, Linux and (blech) NT) is important. Not that I think that Sybase fares that badly in most cases, but the perception is that Oracle is better on the very high end, and with PHB's perception is often the most important thing.
No, you are insane (O.K., you at least sound insane) because you are saying things about a group you obviously know nothing about. While the NRA often opposes government regulations (and often vocally), they do so in a completely law abiding manner. In fact, I can't think of many organizations whose members are on average more law abiding than NRA members (a large percentage of whom are law enforcement officers).
Do you even know anything about the NRA? Or are you just repeating third party disinformation spread by the anti-freedom media? Interestingly enough the media likes to talk about protecting the 1st Amendment (which should be done), but they don't seem to think that it should apply to the NRA.
Unfortunately, civilian firearms are no match the US military
It might seem that way, but unless the US military was willing to take significant casualties and/or unleash weapons of mass destruction against the civilian population (IE start bombing civilians), in fact the military would stand no chance against a motivated, armed guerilla populace. One only has to look to such examples as Viet Nam, Afghanistan, and Chechnya as examples of how traditional armies don't always fare well against entrenched people on their home turf. And as far as the populace goes, the people of those countries are/were way behind the people of the US, where it is estimated that around 80 million of the 270 million population own at least one firearm. And when it comes right down to it, the US military would suffer wide scale defection and low morale if they were required to fire upon people who might be their friends, neighbors or family members. It isn't so easy to kill people who are so like oneself as it is to kill people who are easily identified as enemies (because they look different, speak a different language or are wearing a different uniform).
I know I will get flamed by people with anti-freedom sentiments, but doesn't it seem eerie that this is following so closely behind Australia's virtual complete elimination of private rights to firearm ownership? Seems like Australia and Great Britain are sliding quickly down a slippery slope where virtually all civil rights will be given up permanently in the name of some temporary appearances of safety.
Sadly, there are too many politicians and shortsighted people here in the US that want to bring us the same restrictions on freedom. It seems clear that if the 2nd Amendment is circumvented or eliminated that the 1st Amendment will fall shortly thereafter.
This is good news for me, especially if Oracle does the same thing in the US. While the place that I work currently is a Sybase shop, we are being told by our corporate headquarters that we will eventually have to move everything to Oracle. Corporate is also already using Linux, so this should make it easier to get Linux into our local shop.
But still, a gun is manufactured with a single purpose and that is to hurt or kill. If one makes a tool with a specific purpose there's no way he/she can say: "Hey, it's not my fault."
For one, not all guns are manufactured to hurt or kill, although all are capable of it. Just like not all knives are manufactured to hurt or kill, although all are capable of it. There are quite a number of guns that are designed strictly for target shooting purposes, and which are in general never used for anything else (like Olympic match rifles for example).
You also assume that hurting and/or killing is always wrong. In cases of self-defense, most people would disagree. At any rate, not all guns that are designed and marketed to kill are designed and marketed to kill humans anyway, many are designed for hunting. The majority of us at least here in the US would argue that hunting is an acceptable and legitimate reason for killing animals. Whether you agree or not, both self defense and hunting are certainly legal purposes for using a gun in many parts of the world.
Same thing with Software. One can't make a password crack program and then claim that he/she didn't think anybody would use it to crack passwords and do nasty things with it.
Similarly, password cracking programs can and are used for legitimate purposes by sysadmins who are trying to protect their systems by weeding out bad passwords put in by users.
It is ridiculous to try to push off responsibility to manufacturers when products are misused. If a product is reasonably safe when used as intended, the manufacturer shouldn't be held liable. In the case of products like guns and knives, if they are safe for the operator when used properly, then I'd say the manufacturer is blameless. If a gunmaker builds guns that blow up and injure the user, or a knife that broke and injured the user, then obviously that would be different, and a reasonable person would be expected to hold the manufacturer liable.
Likewise if a piece of software which has a legitimate use were to unexpectedly cause problems or security holes, then the manufacturer might be liable for those problems.
In the book and record industries some companies will actually buy their own books/CDs/tapes at retail outlets (generally ones that they have identified as being ones that are participating in rating services or which are believed to be influential in determining ordering for the chain) in order to make them 'bestsellers' or to drive further stock orders.
One particular book publisher who has been accused of this is Bridge Publications which is a Scientology front company and primary publisher of the pulp sci-fi writings of the late L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology founder). Employees of one of the major bookstore chains have said that books shipped to them by Bridge often come pre-labeled with the bookstore chain's own price stickers and occasionally with price stickers from other stores).
There have been rumors that Microsoft has used the same tactic in promotion of Bill Gate's books ("The Road Ahead" and more recently "Business @ the Speed of Thought"), although I haven't heard any damning evidence like the price stickers to substantiate them.
Wasn't there an article about Microsoft starting their own Anti linux division. Makes me wonder if those guys are participating in discussions on slashdot and spreading FUD.
There are many admitted Microsoft employees who participate here. Some on there own time or 'misappropriated' company time I'm sure. However, I wouldn't be surprised if at least some of the Microsoft people here weren't assigned 'handlers' who read and/or post here. To a certain extent all that is to be expected, and probably something that a lot of companies do. And as long as they stick to posting stuff that is clearly labeled as opinions, or documentably factual, they really aren't doing anything wrong.
On the other hand, Microsoft has a history of 'Astroturf' campaigns. What makes this different is that the intent is to mislead people into thinking that there is a widespread outside group of people who have a certain opinion that doesn't in fact exist. And too often such 'Astroturf' campaigns cross over the line to where opinionated information becomes FUD.
Basically where things start to cross over the line is when people claim to be expressing independant opinions when in fact they have a vested (or paid) interest. Unfortunately Microsoft has even duped some groups into unintentionally supporting their PR campaigns by not being quite forthright about how they fund certain groups that are sympathetic to their interest at a given time.
Slashdot Mirror
If you still have your old keyboard that you used with your XT, get it out of the garage and use it.
Look out though, some XT era keyboards, while using the same DIN-5 connector are not exactly signal compatible with newer machines. Some do have an "AT/XT" switch though. And some XT keyboard (particularly some of the original IBM ones with the dinky shift and return keycaps) are even more heinous than the current cheapo keyboards.
I completely disagree.
:(
You've got a right to your opinion, but I will stick to mine.
You can't do the automation and development and integration of MSOffice, with SO or WP-Suite. Really.
How much do you actually know about PerfectOffice? WordPerfect had automation features way back in the MS-DOS days. StarOffice includes something called StarBasic. I think that the integration, development and automation features of the other products are not only not as bad as you might think, they are probably good enough for most people, especially since I think you overestimate the number of people who actually use them.
The (abused) Macro / VB implementation was a god-send.
Uh, whatever. Macro viruses are enough of a scourge that it almost outweighs any usefulness a macro facility might have. As for VB, all I can say is yuck.
That "95%" don't do anything other than type a letter is just your opinion.
True enough, there is really no way to get an exact figure. However, I personally think that I am being generous with the 95% figure given what I see in the typical office environment. I see lots of people using MS-Word who don't even use the paragraph styles, bulleting, etc. features correctly (I see lots of documents where people have inserted bullets manually or even use 'o' for bullets and fill them in with a marker.
Even my mother managed to set up Word so that it took some figures from an XL spread sheet once per week, and put them into a Word report.
Just because your mother is one of the 5%, doesn't mean that the number of people at that level is as big as you might suggest.
Sure, MS products are bloated, becuase of the way the programming is done at MS, and sure, they are massively over priced. But many (more than that "5%") do need some, or many, of the features...
You still aren't really giving me any real examples of features that are missing
You got a "3" score because you were anti-MS,
Perhaps. Or maybe because the moderator thought I did a better job of presenting my argument.
I stayed firmly at "1" because I dared to say that something (while not good) wasn't bad.
Or maybe because you really didn't add anything constructive to the discussion, like some solid examples.
Sometimes, Slashdot really sucks.
If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. You can help make Slashdot better. Being bitter because you didn't get moderated the way you would like isn't going to do any good. Slashdot is really what the users make it.
P.S. I'm running WM inside eXceed from Win98 - becuase it's the best soloution for me, not becuase I need to grow up and stop hating MS.
I don't really hate MS. I hate some of the things that they do. If they would grow up and learn to play nicely with others, then I wouldn't feel a need to criticize them.
I'm having a bad day already
That is too bad, but you don't have to take it out on the rest of us.
Then you don't need MS Office.
You are correct, and I haven't and won't buy it.
Buy MS-Works which is a lot cheapier.
No thanks, even if it ran on Linux, StarOffice is still much cheaper than MS-Works.
Or simply use Wordpad.
Again, it doesn't run under Linux, and there are plenty of free alternatives with similar or better feature sets. Also Wordpad doesn't include a spreadsheet or the other tools in something like StarOffice.
satisfying 90% of the people is good enough
That isn't what I was saying. What I should have said was that 95% of the people I know use less than 50% of the functionality of MS-Office, therefore it is overkill for most people.
At any rate, the important thing is that the developers of StarOffice and WordPerfect Suite could do a better job of improving their product if people like you would just tell them some specific functionality items you want rather than vague, unspecific gripes.
Do you guys consider yourselves part of that 90%, or are you the 10% that always wants more more more
I don't want gratuitous features (bloat), better functionality is more important than more functionality (and there is a difference -- something Microsoft doesn't seem to grasp). More stability is indeed good, but not something that seems to be a problem with the Linux kernel.
I personally don't have much of a need for Wine (because I don't have a commitment to legacy Windows API apps or developing for Windows), but I recognize its importance to other people. Corel, the makers of WordPerfect, not Microsoft have been the ones helping with Wine. If Microsoft wants to help with Wine, they are free to do so, but I will be shocked if that ever happens because protecting their monopoly seems to be more important to them than growing the acceptance of Win32.
I guess that I am not like most /.ers then. I was born before 1970.
There have also been rumors that Red Hat may try to buy out SCO. I never took them that seriously, because I don't think SCO's corporate culture is OpenSource compatible and I don't think that SCO has all that much to offer to Red Hat, but it could be possible. Probably the biggest obstacle would be the chunks of SCO owned by the Michels', Microsoft, and Novell.
What feature do you want in StarOffice or WordPerfect suite that isn't there? Frankly for probably 95% of the people I know, they are more than feature packed enough. I keep hearing complaints that StarOffice or WordPerfect aren't full featured enough, but I never hear anyone give any details as to what they think is missing. MS-Office is just plain bloated overkill for most people, and too expensive to boot ($169 for the upgrade version of MS-Office versus $99 for WordPerfect Suite outright was the advertised CompUSA price in the paper this weekend).
Basically I think that SGI looks at releasing Linux versions of their apps as a way to create interest in their products, and then hopes that people who like stuff like Iris Performer on Linux will buy SGI hardware or other software in the future.
I remember playing with earlier versions of this software under IRIX a couple of years ago, and it was pretty impressive. I will definitely have to download a copy of this to play with under Linux.
Can't buy a car without a liscense.
Eh? Since when? I've never needed to show a license to buy a car. Not even a new one from a dealer. Certainly not a used one from a (new/used) dealer. Certainly not a used one from a (small independant) dealer. Certainly not in a private transaction between two individuals (like if I see an add in the newspaper classifieds). Hell, you don't even need to show a driver's license to register a car where I live, in fact I've known people who didn't have a driver's license (like a person I know who is legally blind and can't get a driver's license) to be able to register a car and get plates (they owned the car, but paid someone else to drive them around).
Your idea of requiring a license to buy a computer is completely ridiculous, and I hope it was either intended to be ironic or was a weak attempt at humor.
If this sort of crazy scheme actually takes off (hopefully it will get buried where the sun doesn't shine), then it will be time to fork the net. A slightly less drastic measure is to build a network of anonymizing remailers and proxies interconnected by VPNs, so we can build a net on top of the net.
At any rate, this proposal goes way beyond the licensing of cars, since it is something that will be checked every time a person surfs. Car license plates are only checked if and when a police officer happens to think he has reason to do so. Hell, I have neglected to put the little registration stickers on the plates of one of my cars for several years and have never been questioned (the stickers are in the glove box I think, I just never got around to cleaning off the plates so they would stick). And as for the driver, he doesn't even need to show his drivers license unless he is stopped, and even then, the police will often give you 24 hours to prove you have a license if you claim to have forgotten it (of course if you look suspicious, they will probably search you, and your car and run you in to the police station).
On another level, if we require unforgeable certificates (which of course, there is no such thing, especially given the incredible lack of security on the Windows machines and Macs most people surf the net with), it will be going way beyond what we have for the postal system and the telephone system. Anyone who has pocket change can anonymously call anyone they want by using a pay telephone, and you can buy a prepaid long-distance phone card with cash at any Wal-Mart, which will even allow you to call internationally. If you use such a card at a payphone, you are about as anonymous as you can get. As for the postal system, anyone can buy stamps with cash and drop a letter into a post box anonymously. It isn't too difficult to mail even a large package without ever having to show any kind of ID (grocery store mail counters are good for that), despite laws enacted because of the Unibomber which are supposed to make that more difficult.
Any way I look at it, I don't see a 'real world' that is much more 'safe' than the net is, nor do I see what good any kind of restrictions are going to do. People will always find a way to circumvent them, and the stupid will still get caught if they don't circumvent them correctly.
Unfortunately, in most parts of the US, if you are walking down the street and a cop decides you look like someone who he would like to harrass (say you happen to have long hair, be black or hispanic, or are wearing a 2600 T-shirt or some other sign that you are some kind of evil person) and you happen not to have any ID on you and refuse to answer any questions (and you look like you are old enough to drive -- kids can usually get away without having any ID), see how fast you get dragged down to the police station, frisked, handcuffed, fingerprinted, photographed, etc. You'll likely get some kind of bullshit story like you vaguely match the description of someone they are looking for. Of course if pressed, they won't have any documentation of that, but hey, it is your responsibility to prove you are innocent, not their responsibility to prove your guilt.
And unfortunately, from what I've seen, it isn't any better in any other country. It seems to be if you have the bad luck to find some ignorant redneck overzealous cop that is having a bad day, you might as well forget having civil rights. Fortunately, not all cops are like that, but it only takes one really bad one to really ruin your day.
Perhaps the NRA should push for the Swiss solution of every male between 18-60 *must* own a working firearm and must do a year (or is it 2?) of national service training.
Interestingly, it certainly seems to work for the Swiss. They have one of the lowest crime rates in Europe. I've been to Switzerland, and I have to say that the Swiss are very nice, polite people. Its an often overlooked example of widespread access to firearms not necessarily causing any sort of social ills.
Frankly, people like to blame guns for the level of violent crime in the US, and it doesn't wash. The US has higher levels of non-gun violent crime than most of the rest of the world too. However, it is worth noting that violent crime in the US is generally in decline despite the fact that most of the gun control laws on the books are nuisance measures, and the fact that the government has done an absolutely pathetic job of enforcing the laws already on the books. Interestingly, the violent crime rates in Australia and the UK are rising, including their gun related crime, despite near total prohibition of firearms ownership.
I'll repeat that one, because lots of Americans seem to have trouble with it: You Don't Need A Gun To Have Rights In A Democracy.
Well, your example of Australia doesn't seem to be supporting your argument lately. I think we'll keep our guns over here in the US, thanks.
If you are living in a democracy, then nothing and no one can ever take your democratic rights away.
That is completely niave. There are lots of ways a democracy could crumble, both from internal and external reasons. Although everyone hopes it will never be necessary, it seems best to have some insurance in the long run.
Take your pick: either you need guns, the US isn't a genuine Democracy and your 2nd Amendment is the foundation of your Civil Rights
We need guns, the US isn't a pure democracy (it is a republic, technically), and the 2nd Amendment is part of the bill of rights, and it along with the Consitution are certainly a foundation of our civil rights.
Law enforcement officers in the NRA? Sureyou jest!
Surely I don't jest. The NRA is a big supporter of law enforcement, as long as they act within the law, the constitution and the bill of rights. The NRA doesn't speak out against law enforcement, only against excesses comitted by law enforcement agencies or individuals. It is a gross mischaracterization by the media that the NRA is anti law enforcement or that the rank and file of law enforcement agencies are opposed to the NRA.
I occasionally go to gun shows in my area. A good example is that the NRA booth is usually manned by at least one uniformed local police officer.
Don't you recall the fund raising letter a while back where the NRA pontificated against "jack-booted government thugs"?
Have you ever seen the video footage of the Waco incident? Tell me what those BATF agents had on their feet. Many law enforcement officers I have talked to hold about the same opinions about the federal agencies (specifically the BATF, FBI and DEA) as I do. I think they are way out of control and need to be brought into line, and a vast number of the rank-and-file law enforcement officers out there do too.
You remember, the letter that made George Bush publicly denounce the NRA?
Uh, and you are saying this is necessarily a bad thing? George Bush, while better than Clinton, wasn't exactly a great friend of freedom.
That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. Many of us disagree. Frankly I just don't buy your arguments, and if you can't depend at all on the morals of people, then this is truly a more sad world than I think it is, and I consider myself somewhat of a pessimistic skeptic.
The fact that a few turncoats will sometimes act against their own countrymen isn't a good indication that organized military can always easily crush armed civilian guerillas. I think that even your example of the Vichy French collaborators that most French people supported the underground and opposed Hitler. Ultimately, Hitler lost the war, albiet the role the French resistance played in that is debatable. If you've ever heard of the "Guide Lamp Company" and their product "The Liberator", you'd understand how much value the US government saw in arming the French populous against the Nazis.
I'm not sure why your company would want to move to Oracle.
They are doing it in the name of 'standardization'. That is what corporate uses, so that is what we have to move to. We are just one division in a huge company (about 13% or so of the employees of the whole corp). Some of our other divisions are using DB2 or Informix and they will probably have to change to Oracle as well.
Sybase on Linux rocks. Of course Sybase doesn't have the scalability or options that Oracle does, but for mid-ranged databases and even small enterprise databases Sybase can't be beat.
We have everything from tiny databases to huge enterprise databases, so scalability and wide platform level support (Solaris, AIX, HP/UX, Linux and (blech) NT) is important. Not that I think that Sybase fares that badly in most cases, but the perception is that Oracle is better on the very high end, and with PHB's perception is often the most important thing.
No, you are insane (O.K., you at least sound insane) because you are saying things about a group you obviously know nothing about. While the NRA often opposes government regulations (and often vocally), they do so in a completely law abiding manner. In fact, I can't think of many organizations whose members are on average more law abiding than NRA members (a large percentage of whom are law enforcement officers).
Do you even know anything about the NRA? Or are you just repeating third party disinformation spread by the anti-freedom media? Interestingly enough the media likes to talk about protecting the 1st Amendment (which should be done), but they don't seem to think that it should apply to the NRA.
Unfortunately, civilian firearms are no match the US military
It might seem that way, but unless the US military was willing to take significant casualties and/or unleash weapons of mass destruction against the civilian population (IE start bombing civilians), in fact the military would stand no chance against a motivated, armed guerilla populace. One only has to look to such examples as Viet Nam, Afghanistan, and Chechnya as examples of how traditional armies don't always fare well against entrenched people on their home turf. And as far as the populace goes, the people of those countries are/were way behind the people of the US, where it is estimated that around 80 million of the 270 million population own at least one firearm. And when it comes right down to it, the US military would suffer wide scale defection and low morale if they were required to fire upon people who might be their friends, neighbors or family members. It isn't so easy to kill people who are so like oneself as it is to kill people who are easily identified as enemies (because they look different, speak a different language or are wearing a different uniform).
I know I will get flamed by people with anti-freedom sentiments, but doesn't it seem eerie that this is following so closely behind Australia's virtual complete elimination of private rights to firearm ownership? Seems like Australia and Great Britain are sliding quickly down a slippery slope where virtually all civil rights will be given up permanently in the name of some temporary appearances of safety.
Sadly, there are too many politicians and shortsighted people here in the US that want to bring us the same restrictions on freedom. It seems clear that if the 2nd Amendment is circumvented or eliminated that the 1st Amendment will fall shortly thereafter.
This is good news for me, especially if Oracle does the same thing in the US. While the place that I work currently is a Sybase shop, we are being told by our corporate headquarters that we will eventually have to move everything to Oracle. Corporate is also already using Linux, so this should make it easier to get Linux into our local shop.
But still, a gun is manufactured with a single purpose and that is to hurt or kill. If one makes a tool with a specific purpose there's no way he/she can say: "Hey, it's not my fault."
For one, not all guns are manufactured to hurt or kill, although all are capable of it. Just like not all knives are manufactured to hurt or kill, although all are capable of it. There are quite a number of guns that are designed strictly for target shooting purposes, and which are in general never used for anything else (like Olympic match rifles for example).
You also assume that hurting and/or killing is always wrong. In cases of self-defense, most people would disagree. At any rate, not all guns that are designed and marketed to kill are designed and marketed to kill humans anyway, many are designed for hunting. The majority of us at least here in the US would argue that hunting is an acceptable and legitimate reason for killing animals. Whether you agree or not, both self defense and hunting are certainly legal purposes for using a gun in many parts of the world.
Same thing with Software. One can't make a password crack program and then claim that he/she didn't think anybody would use it to crack passwords and do nasty things with it.
Similarly, password cracking programs can and are used for legitimate purposes by sysadmins who are trying to protect their systems by weeding out bad passwords put in by users.
It is ridiculous to try to push off responsibility to manufacturers when products are misused. If a product is reasonably safe when used as intended, the manufacturer shouldn't be held liable. In the case of products like guns and knives, if they are safe for the operator when used properly, then I'd say the manufacturer is blameless. If a gunmaker builds guns that blow up and injure the user, or a knife that broke and injured the user, then obviously that would be different, and a reasonable person would be expected to hold the manufacturer liable.
Likewise if a piece of software which has a legitimate use were to unexpectedly cause problems or security holes, then the manufacturer might be liable for those problems.
In the book and record industries some companies will actually buy their own books/CDs/tapes at retail outlets (generally ones that they have identified as being ones that are participating in rating services or which are believed to be influential in determining ordering for the chain) in order to make them 'bestsellers' or to drive further stock orders.
One particular book publisher who has been accused of this is Bridge Publications which is a Scientology front company and primary publisher of the pulp sci-fi writings of the late L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology founder). Employees of one of the major bookstore chains have said that books shipped to them by Bridge often come pre-labeled with the bookstore chain's own price stickers and occasionally with price stickers from other stores).
There have been rumors that Microsoft has used the same tactic in promotion of Bill Gate's books ("The Road Ahead" and more recently "Business @ the Speed of Thought"), although I haven't heard any damning evidence like the price stickers to substantiate them.
Wasn't there an article about Microsoft starting their own Anti linux division. Makes me wonder if those guys are participating in discussions on slashdot and spreading FUD.
There are many admitted Microsoft employees who participate here. Some on there own time or 'misappropriated' company time I'm sure. However, I wouldn't be surprised if at least some of the Microsoft people here weren't assigned 'handlers' who read and/or post here. To a certain extent all that is to be expected, and probably something that a lot of companies do. And as long as they stick to posting stuff that is clearly labeled as opinions, or documentably factual, they really aren't doing anything wrong.
On the other hand, Microsoft has a history of 'Astroturf' campaigns. What makes this different is that the intent is to mislead people into thinking that there is a widespread outside group of people who have a certain opinion that doesn't in fact exist. And too often such 'Astroturf' campaigns cross over the line to where opinionated information becomes FUD.
Basically where things start to cross over the line is when people claim to be expressing independant opinions when in fact they have a vested (or paid) interest. Unfortunately Microsoft has even duped some groups into unintentionally supporting their PR campaigns by not being quite forthright about how they fund certain groups that are sympathetic to their interest at a given time.