It's this kind of attitude of unions in the US which makes me say most have outlived their usefulness
It's the attitude of management that they don't need to share in the cuts that they ask labor to accept that makes me say unions have never been needed more than they are now.
The management chose to offer the bakers a deal in which management didn't share in any of the pain. The bakers were right to reject it, and management across the country should learn a lesson from this.
The bakers union refused to face reality
Again, management spat in the faces of the unions by not taking any cuts themself. If management refuses to treat labor with dignity, they deserve to lose their company.
He admitted at townhalls with the employees that there was plenty of blame for the company's current circumstances to go all around
Did he offer to take the same pay cut labor was going to suffer? Did he extend that offer to the rest of the executive staff? If not, he's far more to blame than the bakers. You can't blame the bakers for refusing an unfair offer.
How does shit like this get modded up? Does no one remember SCO? Does "private equity" mean nothing to you? There are plenty of ways that executives can profit by pillaging the companies they are supposed to manage.
Nobody's talking about putting Steam in the base install of any distro. If you want users to be able to easily install it, it has to be in the repository. That's what we're talking about.
Because multiple repositories just multiplies the work Valve has to do supporting Linux. Simply packaging things isn't a lot of work, but checking to see if the packages work is. Better to have one canonical archive and let the distros do their own packaging and testing.
That's not what I fail to understand at all. Your statement is entirely true, and only bolsters my assertion that Microsoft's vendor lock in is extremely powerful.
Everyone I have shown LibreOffice hates it within a few seconds because it doesn't look exactly like Office.
That's funny, that's exactly what I used to say about Office 2007. It's also worth noting that they switched to OO in 2007. The change averse users that you are concerned about would have been averse to the ribbon at that point in time. Moving to OpenOffice would have been an easier transition from a UI standpoint.
But that's beside the point. If you actually RTFA, the complaints have nothing to do with the UI. It's the rendering inconsistencies between the two platforms that's the problem. And Microsoft is 100% responsible for that problem.
Valve wants to make it easy? Run a repo, and provide instructions for using it.
Repos only work for one distro. Or a closely related family (e.g. debian/ubuntu/mint) at best. The right thing to do is provide a tarball under as permissive a license as possible, and let the distros do their own packaging.
Proof again that LibreOffice is no MS Office replacement.
No, this is only proof of the strength of Microsoft's vendor lock-in.
It has been stated over and over again that without exact formatting and file compatibility it will not be useful.
Which it would have, if only Microsoft adhered to standards. Somehow open source software is able to accurately render HTML, PDFs, SVGs, but not DOCs? The only reason this would happen is if someone is playing fast and loose with the specs.
Any decently designed crypto system should be able to drop in a null cipher as easily as any other. If it takes more than a trivial amount of work to add a DRM-free option, that's a sign of really bad design decisions on the part of their engineers. Netflix should fix that for the sake of their own platforms robustness.
They don't advertise miniPCI slots as available on the system.
That doesn't make deliberately crippling the slots in order to sell more proprietary hardware any better. I don't care if they advertise it or not. It is a mini-PCI slot and they are deliberately breaking it. They're assholes.
The fact that the UEFI code even bothers to interrogate that string for anything other than displaying it to the user tells you that the manufacturer doesn't care about, and doesn't test, anything but Windows to the point they will hard-core their machines to only run Windows. They don't care about UEFI at all, or secure booting, or anything - just that it works when they run Windows.
Makes you kinda wonder who would ultimately be behind putting such an unnecessary and counter-productive decision into a machine's BIOS really.
And people don't believe me when I tell them that OEMs will chomp at the bit to lock people out of other OSs with secure boot when MS finally flips the switch. They already care about nothing but Windows.
Why would I pay Netflix when they won't bother to support my OS? If they want my money, they can port their software to my OS, or they can package Wine with their software, and support that.
They would also have to change their policy on DRM-free content before they get any of my money. I'm willing to pay for TV, I'm even willing to watch their ads. I'm not willing to facilitate an effort to make DRM the norm.
According to TFA, the pension funds account for 11 billion of the 15 billion shortfall:
Much of the Postal Service's loss in 2012 came from two defaults on a total of more than $11 billion in payments that Congress had directed USPS to pay into a fund for future retiree health benefits.
The only reason the Post Office is having financial problems is because "fiscally responsible" republicans passed a bill that requires it to pre-fund pensions 75 years in advance. Yes, that's right. The USPS is required to have cash on hand for pensions for employees that have not even been born yet.
To summarize, it seems like your argument boils down to you preferring the current inefficient system--that produces worse content at a higher cost--because it allows you to freeload. I can see how you'd prefer that, but I don't see how you can argue that it's actually a better system overall.
Slashdot Mirror
Being around cops is dangerous, no matter how many of them there are.
Good god, Torchwood was all around awful.
It's this kind of attitude of unions in the US which makes me say most have outlived their usefulness
It's the attitude of management that they don't need to share in the cuts that they ask labor to accept that makes me say unions have never been needed more than they are now.
The Baker's unions chose
The management chose to offer the bakers a deal in which management didn't share in any of the pain. The bakers were right to reject it, and management across the country should learn a lesson from this.
The bakers union refused to face reality
Again, management spat in the faces of the unions by not taking any cuts themself. If management refuses to treat labor with dignity, they deserve to lose their company.
He admitted at townhalls with the employees that there was plenty of blame for the company's current circumstances to go all around
Did he offer to take the same pay cut labor was going to suffer? Did he extend that offer to the rest of the executive staff? If not, he's far more to blame than the bakers. You can't blame the bakers for refusing an unfair offer.
You're talking about management here, right? They're the ones who let things get so bad a strike would sink the company.
Destroying a company never benefits executives.
How does shit like this get modded up? Does no one remember SCO? Does "private equity" mean nothing to you? There are plenty of ways that executives can profit by pillaging the companies they are supposed to manage.
Nobody's talking about putting Steam in the base install of any distro. If you want users to be able to easily install it, it has to be in the repository. That's what we're talking about.
Because multiple repositories just multiplies the work Valve has to do supporting Linux. Simply packaging things isn't a lot of work, but checking to see if the packages work is. Better to have one canonical archive and let the distros do their own packaging and testing.
That's not what I fail to understand at all. Your statement is entirely true, and only bolsters my assertion that Microsoft's vendor lock in is extremely powerful.
Back in reality the money was gone
And you blame the baker's union for that?
Everyone I have shown LibreOffice hates it within a few seconds because it doesn't look exactly like Office.
That's funny, that's exactly what I used to say about Office 2007. It's also worth noting that they switched to OO in 2007. The change averse users that you are concerned about would have been averse to the ribbon at that point in time. Moving to OpenOffice would have been an easier transition from a UI standpoint.
But that's beside the point. If you actually RTFA, the complaints have nothing to do with the UI. It's the rendering inconsistencies between the two platforms that's the problem. And Microsoft is 100% responsible for that problem.
Valve wants to make it easy? Run a repo, and provide instructions for using it.
Repos only work for one distro. Or a closely related family (e.g. debian/ubuntu/mint) at best. The right thing to do is provide a tarball under as permissive a license as possible, and let the distros do their own packaging.
The merit of the software being primarily measured by interoperability with Microsoft Office. That's how strong Microsoft's vendor lock in is.
Proof again that LibreOffice is no MS Office replacement.
No, this is only proof of the strength of Microsoft's vendor lock-in.
It has been stated over and over again that without exact formatting and file compatibility it will not be useful.
Which it would have, if only Microsoft adhered to standards. Somehow open source software is able to accurately render HTML, PDFs, SVGs, but not DOCs? The only reason this would happen is if someone is playing fast and loose with the specs.
Perhaps, but I think the simpler explanation is that they intend to bankrupt the USPS because socialism.
Any decently designed crypto system should be able to drop in a null cipher as easily as any other. If it takes more than a trivial amount of work to add a DRM-free option, that's a sign of really bad design decisions on the part of their engineers. Netflix should fix that for the sake of their own platforms robustness.
They don't advertise miniPCI slots as available on the system.
That doesn't make deliberately crippling the slots in order to sell more proprietary hardware any better. I don't care if they advertise it or not. It is a mini-PCI slot and they are deliberately breaking it. They're assholes.
The fact that the UEFI code even bothers to interrogate that string for anything other than displaying it to the user tells you that the manufacturer doesn't care about, and doesn't test, anything but Windows to the point they will hard-core their machines to only run Windows. They don't care about UEFI at all, or secure booting, or anything - just that it works when they run Windows.
Makes you kinda wonder who would ultimately be behind putting such an unnecessary and counter-productive decision into a machine's BIOS really.
And people don't believe me when I tell them that OEMs will chomp at the bit to lock people out of other OSs with secure boot when MS finally flips the switch. They already care about nothing but Windows.
Why would I pay Netflix when they won't bother to support my OS? If they want my money, they can port their software to my OS, or they can package Wine with their software, and support that.
They would also have to change their policy on DRM-free content before they get any of my money. I'm willing to pay for TV, I'm even willing to watch their ads. I'm not willing to facilitate an effort to make DRM the norm.
According to TFA, the pension funds account for 11 billion of the 15 billion shortfall:
The only reason the Post Office is having financial problems is because "fiscally responsible" republicans passed a bill that requires it to pre-fund pensions 75 years in advance. Yes, that's right. The USPS is required to have cash on hand for pensions for employees that have not even been born yet.
1200 cycles per minute isn't the maximum. It's the frequency needed to exert 3% tension.
it's DEFINITELY not fair to say Microsoft has been riding the coattails of anybody
Microsoft rides its own coattails through vendor lock in.
To summarize, it seems like your argument boils down to you preferring the current inefficient system--that produces worse content at a higher cost--because it allows you to freeload. I can see how you'd prefer that, but I don't see how you can argue that it's actually a better system overall.