It was Microsoft who told these home users that they could be connected without any hassles. They can't just backtrack now and blame their users.
So yes Unix may be secure but it is arcane and difficult to learn and use.. but no unix vendor has ever stated (afaik) that anyone can use their product without any knowledge about computers.
Re:No one took your time in the first place.
on
Take Back Your Time!
·
· Score: 1
Which is why I have no sympathy for the single types who just went on world tours while those of us who were a bit more settled took it up the butt. ..
but don't have a right to decide how hard to work, at their own choice!
Ok well I cannot comment on the laws in France, I will presume you are correct. It still doesn't make a point to me. If true, the law you point out is indeed silly but then, the french are know for rather silly laws:) (in fact: when travelling to France, expect delays:)).
How is one expected to build wealth and improve their standard of living in a Socialist nation?
*sigh* This is offcourse where we will never agree . It is quite possible to become wealthy and improve your standard of living in a socialist nation but offcourse what you mean is that you have to pay a lot of taxes. Well what can I say, nobody actually likes taxes but I am supporting my neighbours and friends who might not be as lucky as I am and I can live with that quit happily.
However, what percentage of those living in America's slums and ghettos make an effort to leave and/or radically change their lifestyle?
Ah, the old "people who live in slums must like living there" argument. Sorry, I don't buy it. There is no equal-chance fairy who gives everybody an equal helping at birth, life is not that simple. What of the child of a crack whore, where is he gonna learn the can-do attitude that you have? How is he gonna get the skills he needs to advance in life? How is he even gonna know he should? Be glad you have what it takes but don't just throw away people because they don't, it is not that simple.
I could travel to almost any hospital in America and, if medically necessary, get an MRI, TODAY
Well I wasn't claiming that people are being left for dead on the streets but I hope you'll agree with me that knowing that you're going to be indebted for it the rest of your life is a great way to stop people from seeking medical attention even when they need it. It's one way to reduce waiting I guess but still.... Granted though, as you rightly point out, nobody's perfect and waiting lists over here (the Netherlands) are pretty as you say way too long...touche.
So I win the dare. Now what? Are you open-minded enough to admit that there are alternatives to your worldview that *just might* be correct?
No you don't! I didn't ask for you to agree with yourself, I kinda took that as a given:). I asked to find someone at the other end of the spectrum to agree with you. And unless you claim to be at both ends at the same time (in which case I will dub thee sir quantum Turner of the spectrums) you do not qualify.
The question is, are you open-minded enough to admit that your worldview *just might not be correct*. I never presumed to have 'the' correct worldview, and admitting that there are alternatives that *might be correct* comes pretty naturally to me. The trick is to find the right one isn it?
Those who choose to work hard will be succesfull anywhere. Granted maybe not as filthy rich as you can get in America:) but still.
Anyway, success is pretty relative. I wouldn't call the inner-city slums in America a great success and I wouldn't call the states' lack of funding for education a sucess nor would I call the lack of universal health care a success.
Different people, different measures for success, but I'll still dare you to find a person who is at the wrong end of your successful system to agree with you.
Just a side-note, but it amazes me that people will insist on using a complex tool (such as a computer) and not be willing to learn the basics about it, or even how to properly maintain it. You don't do that with your car, so why do that with your computer?
The thing is, that it was Microsoft who 'gave' the Internet to the masses. Their advertising never said anything about 'critical updates', it just mentioned how easy it was to connect. For better or for worse, all these people are now connected.
Your car analogy fails on a lot of points. You get a license to drive a car on how able you are to DRIVE a car, not on how able you are in maintaining it. People (usually) maintain their cars because: a) they really need them, b) they (cars) are generally worth a lot more then your typical pc or c) some governments impose a regular checkup for safety reasons.
Using your car analogy would make most users feel safe because their tech savvy cousin just checked it out last month! If there was anything seriously wrong with the car the MANUFACTURER would have gone out of its way to notify people.
And yes, the Internet should be for everyone. The WWW especially (sorry Tim but it's true:)) was made to be goofing around in and seeing what the results can be.
Instead of always blaming users who, for the most part regard computers and the Internet as a toy, OS manufacturers should try to give at least a modicum amount of safety to their users and try to act at least a little bit responsible when they can't even produce that.
BTW before anyone starts: Yes linux fails this test equally, but at least you don't have to pay a shitload for the privilege.
Well I don't know about your part of town, but around here night tends to start at 00:00:00 and the period preceding it, we affectionately like to call evening, during which we enjoy typical 'evening' stuff like going to movies, spending time with SO's and so on.
Furthermore we like to place our mornings so that they neatly coincide with the end of 'night'. This usually happens around 6.
I say 'usually' because I am normally not awake at this point and if I am, I am usually to inebriated to check the exact time. There have been points in my life where I was both sober and awake enough to witness this grand event, but they have been few and do not make a compelling argument.
The transition from evening to night however, I have witnessed many times and I can vouch for it's accuracy.
Ehr...I think that should be 'capisci?'...'capisco?'I think would translate to 'Do I understand?' . Ofcourse it is possible that that is what you meant:-)
Ehr..well as you rightly suspect they have nothing to do with the language really, except that in my bitterness of maintaining too much Perl crap that should never have been written in ANY language, I see it as an attitude found in too many Perl coders.
I realize this is a gross generalization (I did state so even:-)) and Perl certainly isn't alone in this. The next big victim of poor coding standards is probably PHP.
The thing however that irks me about Perl is that it makes it entirely too easy to obfuscate your incompetence. Perl really does encourage writing unreadable code.
You can write beautiful and very scalable code in Perl.
I'm sure you could, the thing is I've never seen anything in Perl that was scalable let alone beautyful.
I'm not trying to bash all Perl coders out there. But in my experience most Perl coders, when faced with "there's more than one way to do it" will choose the ugly, unreadable way.
Yes, you can write unreadable code in any language just as you can write decent code in Perl. The difference is that in most languages you have to go out of your way to make code truly unreadable, while in Perl you have to go out of your way to make it readable.
Furthermore my experience has been (beware: sweeping generalizations coming up) that Perl coders tend to care about Perl, Perl and nothing but Perl. Why normalize a DB when you have Perl, why make a decent user interface when anyone can see it was written in Perl and therefore superior by default!.
And don't point me to slashcode, I've never actually looked at the code, but any decent web-programmer only has to look at the brain-dead interface to know that it was written in Perl.
Yes they knew it was dangerous but I hope you're not implying that anyone who, knowingly, takes a risk should be left for dead when anything goes wrong. Good luck finding volunteers for YOUR missions.
Yes the Columbia astronauts knowingly took a risk. But if they had known that NASA managment would sweep aside any comments from their engineers for cost-efficiency reasons then maybe they would have felt differently.
I see your points, but NASA the way it is now won't get us anywhere either, it will just get people dead.
Also I think in this case there was nothing much to blow a wistle on.
If I read the article correctly the engineers did not KNOW that anything was wrong but were increasingly worried about possible damage and wanted more info to either correctly asses it or dismiss it.
Don't get me wrong, NASA managment should have listened to them. But for all they knew at that time, Columbia might have returned safely and any whistle-blower would have been left looking silly with a whistle in his mouth.
The fault in this is really NASA managment and bureaucracy. If experts are worrying and you're not an expert yourself, start worrying!
It's not a usefull comparison. Life having evolved on at least one planet is an undisputed fact, and I am here as proof of that:). On this you can make a reasonable assumption that it could exist elsewhere. Yes, believing in extra-terrestrial intelligent life is still only a belief, but it has some basis.
If an astrological prediction came true, would that prove that astrology was accurate?
No, because astrology is not just about making predictions, but about believing that celestial bodies have an influence over our lives and making predictions on that assumption. One prediction that checks out still leaves the assumption baseless.
My point is that belief in astrology and belief in extra-terrestrial intelligent life are both just that: beliefs.
And my point was NOT that extra-terrestrial life is a given, but that, believing that it might exist is in a entirely different ballpark than believing in astrology. Yes both are beliefs, but one is based on an assumption that has proven to be correct (life can evolve, given the right circumstances) and one is based on an assumption that has no evidence whatsoever.
The only planet that we know that has intelligent life is earth.
Well duh! That was the parent posters point. That is, I have never heard of any convincing evidence of ANY life that did not evolve on earth.
The point is that we know that, given the right circumstances, life can evolve. It happened on earth, why not somewhere else?
This is obviously not proof, but believing in extra-terrestrial life does not really equal belief in astrology which. As far as I know, has no foundation apart from 'esoteric' sources.
As far as I know, there haven't been any solar systems discovered, besides ours, with this structure.
Yes, and we've looked at all of them twice, just to make sure!
I once saw an ATM trying to boot NT and complaining about services not found. It was pretty funny to see and I wish I could have taken a picture,
Regardless, I don't feel too much like MS bashing today:-), I think it is possible to make a safe application on top of any os, even one made by Microsoft.
Making a self-contained app.that doesn't use any os features that could compromise it, and only sends out self-encrypted data to known hosts that are kept within the app. is VERY possible.
I would think (ok hope) that banks would use this kind of applications, regardless of the OS they choose. So that the worry is about the uptime of ATM's and not about the integrity of your account.
Sooo, basically you're saying that as long as a company doesn't deny it's mistakes than everthing must be ok?
they said "We own the copyright on that software and on those e-mails. Take them down or we will sue you for copyright infringment."
And this makes you feel better how? A company has known ties to a party, and yet, makes voting software that CAN BE MANIPULATED!!
I'm not saying that they would, I have no evidence of that. What I do see is a company that is not taking it's responsibility very seriously and has a tendency to lean a certain way. Democracy deserves better than that!
Democracy needs transparency to work. So that everyone who participates can be sure that, even if their side lost, it was a fair deal.
This might not be a conspiracy, but it smells to much like it to ever be democratic.
I see your point but (and I'm not claiming that I can solve it either) there has to be some sort of trade.
You cannot expect people to devote their lives or their livelyhood on a good idea and in the end have them walk away with a lot of debts beacuse everyone copied them and were better at marketing.
Opposite, I don't expect countries plagued with aids victims to pay a lot of attentions to patents when their peoples are actually dying.
There should be some kind off a balance, companies that spend a lot of resources on findig say, a cure for aids, and finding it, deserve to be rewarded for it. At the same time people with aids should not be extorted by these companies.
It's a pickle and current IP laws in most countries are no help at all.
P.s. I've used AIDS as an example because it is a pretty good example of what is wrong. AFAIK there is currently no cure for AIDS but there are treatments that will slow the disease and even, in some cases, halt it. Companies who have developed these treatments are (somewhat understandably) relunctant to give their IP away, since it is the only way they can make money off of it. Meanwhile countries that need these treatments most can't afford them and are more and more saying "screw you, people are dying here".
Your arguments are so flawed I don't know where to start.
One possible reason why it should not be legal to hack the XBox and run non-MS games or Linux on it is that it would effectively preclude Microsoft from adopting a modified razor blade strategy
Selling a product at a loss does not give you a right to make a profit. If Gillete's razors were (apart from being razors) also very good at cleaning dirt from hooves (or whatever), people might have used it for that, and that alone and Gilette would have been lost to history.
He gambled on his product and he won - big time. Good for him!
If one insists that one has a "right" to hack the XBox and run Sony games or Linux on it, Microsoft's response may be to raise the price of the XBox to at least the level of its marginal cost. Thus, consumers will wind up paying more for the same product. As a result, demand will go down, and this may result in unemployment and/or reduced wages.
This is the most absurd argument yet. Buying an XBox makes me responsible for Microsofts profit and potential loss of jobs??
What if I buy an XBox and use it as a door-stop. Am i now obliged to buy XBox games which I will never use, because otherwise Microsoft will have it's right to profit empeded? Or is not buying products you don't need unpatriotic now?
but instead must offer that good or service to you on terms you feel are satisfactory, or not at all.
this is in fact how sales work, if you don't agree with the terms there is no sale and this goes for both the selling and the buying side.
Instead, many insist on the right to unilaterally modify the terms and conditions of sale -- after the fact.
So right and yet so wrong. The sale is already done! These people have bought an XBox from Microsoft, who agreed to sell it to them at a loss. Microsof has no right to demand how people use their products, especially not -- after the fact.
Yes, but your individual judgement call is way off to me.
Everybody from SCO is unhireable(sp?) EVER?
I was a lower manager at SCO and when things started to go rotten I did my best to try and save a company I had grown to love -- Sorry you're out
I was a salesman for CSO and things started to get rotten. But my clients depended on me and the things I had promised them and I felt I couldn't leave before I knew they were satisfied. -- Sorry you're out
I was a coder at SCO and I was working on a project that could realy have made some revenue. But nobody would listen and more and more people left, but this was something I really believed in and so I stayed and finished it. -- Sorry you're out
I don't know if any of these people exist, but neither do you! According to you everybody who works at SCO is branded 'criminal' and should never work again!
Who are you to make these judgements, are you so damn perfect and untouchable?
According to me, everybody deserves a fair hearing at least.
Slashdot Mirror
It was Microsoft who told these home users that they could be connected without any hassles. They can't just backtrack now and blame their users.
So yes Unix may be secure but it is arcane and difficult to learn and use.. but no unix vendor has ever stated (afaik) that anyone can use their product without any knowledge about computers.
Which is why I have no sympathy for the single types who just went on world tours while those of us who were a bit more settled took it up the butt. . .
Huh?!? How is that?
but don't have a right to decide how hard to work, at their own choice!
:) (in fact: when travelling to France, expect delays :)).
...touche.
:). I asked to find someone at the other end of the spectrum to agree with you. And unless you claim to be at both ends at the same time (in which case I will dub thee sir quantum Turner of the spectrums) you do not qualify.
Ok well I cannot comment on the laws in France, I will presume you are correct. It still doesn't make a point to me. If true, the law you point out is indeed silly but then, the french are know for rather silly laws
How is one expected to build wealth and improve their standard of living in a Socialist nation?
*sigh* This is offcourse where we will never agree . It is quite possible to become wealthy and improve your standard of living in a socialist nation but offcourse what you mean is that you have to pay a lot of taxes. Well what can I say, nobody actually likes taxes but I am supporting my neighbours and friends who might not be as lucky as I am and I can live with that quit happily.
However, what percentage of those living in America's slums and ghettos make an effort to leave and/or radically change their lifestyle?
Ah, the old "people who live in slums must like living there" argument. Sorry, I don't buy it. There is no equal-chance fairy who gives everybody an equal helping at birth, life is not that simple. What of the child of a crack whore, where is he gonna learn the can-do attitude that you have? How is he gonna get the skills he needs to advance in life? How is he even gonna know he should? Be glad you have what it takes but don't just throw away people because they don't, it is not that simple.
I could travel to almost any hospital in America and, if medically necessary, get an MRI, TODAY
Well I wasn't claiming that people are being left for dead on the streets but I hope you'll agree with me that knowing that you're going to be indebted for it the rest of your life is a great way to stop people from seeking medical attention even when they need it. It's one way to reduce waiting I guess but still.... Granted though, as you rightly point out, nobody's perfect and waiting lists over here (the Netherlands) are pretty as you say way too long
So I win the dare. Now what? Are you open-minded enough to admit that there are alternatives to your worldview that *just might* be correct?
No you don't! I didn't ask for you to agree with yourself, I kinda took that as a given
The question is, are you open-minded enough to admit that your worldview *just might not be correct*. I never presumed to have 'the' correct worldview, and admitting that there are alternatives that *might be correct* comes pretty naturally to me. The trick is to find the right one isn it?
Those who choose to work hard will be succesfull anywhere. Granted maybe not as filthy rich as you can get in America :) but still.
Anyway, success is pretty relative. I wouldn't call the inner-city slums in America a great success and I wouldn't call the states' lack of funding for education a sucess nor would I call the lack of universal health care a success.
Different people, different measures for success, but I'll still dare you to find a person who is at the wrong end of your successful system to agree with you.
Just a side-note, but it amazes me that people will insist on using a complex tool (such as a computer) and not be willing to learn the basics about it, or even how to properly maintain it. You don't do that with your car, so why do that with your computer?
:)) was made to be goofing around in and seeing what the results can be.
The thing is, that it was Microsoft who 'gave' the Internet to the masses. Their advertising never said anything about 'critical updates', it just mentioned how easy it was to connect. For better or for worse, all these people are now connected.
Your car analogy fails on a lot of points. You get a license to drive a car on how able you are to DRIVE a car, not on how able you are in maintaining it. People (usually) maintain their cars because: a) they really need them, b) they (cars) are generally worth a lot more then your typical pc or c) some governments impose a regular checkup for safety reasons.
Using your car analogy would make most users feel safe because their tech savvy cousin just checked it out last month! If there was anything seriously wrong with the car the MANUFACTURER would have gone out of its way to notify people.
And yes, the Internet should be for everyone. The WWW especially (sorry Tim but it's true
Instead of always blaming users who, for the most part regard computers and the Internet as a toy, OS manufacturers should try to give at least a modicum amount of safety to their users and try to act at least a little bit responsible when they can't even produce that.
BTW before anyone starts: Yes linux fails this test equally, but at least you don't have to pay a shitload for the privilege.
PHP is nowhere as MAINTAINABLE as Java
How is that? (seriously)
Well I don't know about your part of town, but around here night tends to start at 00:00:00 and the period preceding it, we affectionately like to call evening, during which we enjoy typical 'evening' stuff like going to movies, spending time with SO's and so on.
Furthermore we like to place our mornings so that they neatly coincide with the end of 'night'. This usually happens around 6.
I say 'usually' because I am normally not awake at this point and if I am, I am usually to inebriated to check the exact time. There have been points in my life where I was both sober and awake enough to witness this grand event, but they have been few and do not make a compelling argument.
The transition from evening to night however, I have witnessed many times and I can vouch for it's accuracy.
Ehr...I think that should be 'capisci?'...'capisco?'I think would translate to 'Do I understand?' . Ofcourse it is possible that that is what you meant :-)
Huh? this is supposed to be a usabillity standard? My boss would fire me for making crap like that and rightly so! This is a usabillity nightmare!
Ehr..well as you rightly suspect they have nothing to do with the language really, except that in my bitterness of maintaining too much Perl crap that should never have been written in ANY language, I see it as an attitude found in too many Perl coders.
:-)) and Perl certainly isn't alone in this. The next big victim of poor coding standards is probably PHP.
I realize this is a gross generalization (I did state so even
The thing however that irks me about Perl is that it makes it entirely too easy to obfuscate your incompetence. Perl really does encourage writing unreadable code.
You can write beautiful and very scalable code in Perl.
I'm sure you could, the thing is I've never seen anything in Perl that was scalable let alone beautyful.
I'm not trying to bash all Perl coders out there. But in my experience most Perl coders, when faced with "there's more than one way to do it" will choose the ugly, unreadable way.
Yes, you can write unreadable code in any language just as you can write decent code in Perl. The difference is that in most languages you have to go out of your way to make code truly unreadable, while in Perl you have to go out of your way to make it readable.
Furthermore my experience has been (beware: sweeping generalizations coming up) that Perl coders tend to care about Perl, Perl and nothing but Perl. Why normalize a DB when you have Perl, why make a decent user interface when anyone can see it was written in Perl and therefore superior by default!.
And don't point me to slashcode, I've never actually looked at the code, but any decent web-programmer only has to look at the brain-dead interface to know that it was written in Perl.
Does that mean I have a problem?
:-)
Yes, but apparently you're recovering
Yes they knew it was dangerous but I hope you're not implying that anyone who, knowingly, takes a risk should be left for dead when anything goes wrong. Good luck finding volunteers for YOUR missions.
Yes the Columbia astronauts knowingly took a risk. But if they had known that NASA managment would sweep aside any comments from their engineers for cost-efficiency reasons then maybe they would have felt differently.
I see your points, but NASA the way it is now won't get us anywhere either, it will just get people dead.
Also I think in this case there was nothing much to blow a wistle on.
If I read the article correctly the engineers did not KNOW that anything was wrong but were increasingly worried about possible damage and wanted more info to either correctly asses it or dismiss it.
Don't get me wrong, NASA managment should have listened to them. But for all they knew at that time, Columbia might have returned safely and any whistle-blower would have been left looking silly with a whistle in his mouth.
The fault in this is really NASA managment and bureaucracy. If experts are worrying and you're not an expert yourself, start worrying!
Hey, this is not MTV! If you can't focus your attention on the subject at hand for longer than 5 minutes, then please refrain from commenting.
Hint: people died and NASA has some serious issues, nothing to do with your political preference.
It's not a usefull comparison. Life having evolved on at least one planet is an undisputed fact, and I am here as proof of that :). On this you can make a reasonable assumption that it could exist elsewhere. Yes, believing in extra-terrestrial intelligent life is still only a belief, but it has some basis.
If an astrological prediction came true, would that prove that astrology was accurate?
No, because astrology is not just about making predictions, but about believing that celestial bodies have an influence over our lives and making predictions on that assumption. One prediction that checks out still leaves the assumption baseless.
My point is that belief in astrology and belief in extra-terrestrial intelligent life are both just that: beliefs.
And my point was NOT that extra-terrestrial life is a given, but that, believing that it might exist is in a entirely different ballpark than believing in astrology. Yes both are beliefs, but one is based on an assumption that has proven to be correct (life can evolve, given the right circumstances) and one is based on an assumption that has no evidence whatsoever.
Yes, yes, we've all had the email but thanks for reminding us anyhow :-)....can I work from home by the way?
The only planet that we know that has intelligent life is earth.
:).
Well duh! That was the parent posters point. That is, I have never heard of any convincing evidence of ANY life that did not evolve on earth.
The point is that we know that, given the right circumstances, life can evolve. It happened on earth, why not somewhere else?
This is obviously not proof, but believing in extra-terrestrial life does not really equal belief in astrology which. As far as I know, has no foundation apart from 'esoteric' sources.
As far as I know, there haven't been any solar systems discovered, besides ours, with this structure.
Yes, and we've looked at all of them twice, just to make sure!
Sorry but it's a big universe out there
And it does a good job doing what it does :).
:)
Well hey, it does a pretty good job not doing what it doesn't do as well
I once saw an ATM trying to boot NT and complaining about services not found. It was pretty funny to see and I wish I could have taken a picture,
:-), I think it is possible to make a safe application on top of any os, even one made by Microsoft.
Regardless, I don't feel too much like MS bashing today
Making a self-contained app.that doesn't use any os features that could compromise it, and only sends out self-encrypted data to known hosts that are kept within the app. is VERY possible.
I would think (ok hope) that banks would use this kind of applications, regardless of the OS they choose. So that the worry is about the uptime of ATM's and not about the integrity of your account.
Sooo, basically you're saying that as long as a company doesn't deny it's mistakes than everthing must be ok?
they said "We own the copyright on that software and on those e-mails. Take them down or we will sue you for copyright infringment."
And this makes you feel better how? A company has known ties to a party, and yet, makes voting software that CAN BE MANIPULATED!!
I'm not saying that they would, I have no evidence of that. What I do see is a company that is not taking it's responsibility very seriously and has a tendency to lean a certain way. Democracy deserves better than that!
Democracy needs transparency to work. So that everyone who participates can be sure that, even if their side lost, it was a fair deal.
This might not be a conspiracy, but it smells to much like it to ever be democratic.
I see your point but (and I'm not claiming that I can solve it either) there has to be some sort of trade.
You cannot expect people to devote their lives or their livelyhood on a good idea and in the end have them walk away with a lot of debts beacuse everyone copied them and were better at marketing.
Opposite, I don't expect countries plagued with aids victims to pay a lot of attentions to patents when their peoples are actually dying.
There should be some kind off a balance, companies that spend a lot of resources on findig say, a cure for aids, and finding it, deserve to be rewarded for it. At the same time people with aids should not be extorted by these companies.
It's a pickle and current IP laws in most countries are no help at all.
P.s. I've used AIDS as an example because it is a pretty good example of what is wrong. AFAIK there is currently no cure for AIDS but there are treatments that will slow the disease and even, in some cases, halt it.
Companies who have developed these treatments are (somewhat understandably) relunctant to give their IP away, since it is the only way they can make money off of it.
Meanwhile countries that need these treatments most can't afford them and are more and more saying "screw you, people are dying here".
Actually if you just go to http://www.ucomics.com/calvinandhobbes/ you'll find that they still rotate the cartoons dayly in order...
:-)
The cartoon referenced just happened to be today's
Your arguments are so flawed I don't know where to start.
One possible reason why it should not be legal to hack the XBox and run non-MS games or Linux on it is that it would effectively preclude Microsoft from adopting a modified razor blade strategy
Selling a product at a loss does not give you a right to make a profit. If Gillete's razors were (apart from being razors) also very good at cleaning dirt from hooves (or whatever), people might have used it for that, and that alone and Gilette would have been lost to history.
He gambled on his product and he won - big time. Good for him!
If one insists that one has a "right" to hack the XBox and run Sony games or Linux on it, Microsoft's response may be to raise the price of the XBox to at least the level of its marginal cost. Thus, consumers will wind up paying more for the same product. As a result, demand will go down, and this may result in unemployment and/or reduced wages.
This is the most absurd argument yet. Buying an XBox makes me responsible for Microsofts profit and potential loss of jobs??
What if I buy an XBox and use it as a door-stop. Am i now obliged to buy XBox games which I will never use, because otherwise Microsoft will have it's right to profit empeded? Or is not buying products you don't need unpatriotic now?
but instead must offer that good or service to you on terms you feel are satisfactory, or not at all.
this is in fact how sales work, if you don't agree with the terms there is no sale and this goes for both the selling and the buying side.
Instead, many insist on the right to unilaterally modify the terms and conditions of sale -- after the fact.
So right and yet so wrong. The sale is already done! These people have bought an XBox from Microsoft, who agreed to sell it to them at a loss. Microsof has no right to demand how people use their products, especially not -- after the fact.
Yes, but your individual judgement call is way off to me.
Everybody from SCO is unhireable(sp?) EVER?
I was a lower manager at SCO and when things started to go rotten I did my best to try and save a company I had grown to love -- Sorry you're out
I was a salesman for CSO and things started to get rotten. But my clients depended on me and the things I had promised them and I felt I couldn't leave before I knew they were satisfied. -- Sorry you're out
I was a coder at SCO and I was working on a project that could realy have made some revenue. But nobody would listen and more and more people left, but this was something I really believed in and so I stayed and finished it. -- Sorry you're out
I don't know if any of these people exist, but neither do you! According to you everybody who works at SCO is branded 'criminal' and should never work again!
Who are you to make these judgements, are you so damn perfect and untouchable?
According to me, everybody deserves a fair hearing at least.