Then you have not meet any real libertarians. Allow me to explain. First of all Holmes was writing in dissent on that case. Keep that in mind . It is in fact fine to yell fire in a crowded theatre if as a result people die and there was not a fire then yes you were in the wrong. Encouraging someone to kill only causes real damage if and when someone tries to kill or does in fact kill that person and it can be proven that the person who killed that person in fact had no reasonable alternative but to kill that person because you said to. The theory behind the fire thing is that if you yell fire then most people will not have the time or tools to figure out if you are right or not and therefore you will cause them to do bad things. This was more true in Holmes' day due to the fact that theatres were likely to be on fire at that time. The fact of the matter is to prove this one you would have to prove that by someone posting something on the internet and a average resonable person looking at it would they be compelled to run out and do what it says with no thought on their own. I and every other livertarian that I know understand this fact. Most of us spend a large amount of time in these conversations debunking the "fire myth". So now do you understand? If not please ask me a question.:)
That would be wrong. Justice Holmes wrote that opnion in dissent. The law in fact is such that you do have the right to yell fire in a theater. You may want to look here and here to understand why.
Ok so you think that just because some people have weak minds that the government should be allowed to control what we hear, see and say. Just throw think in there also. I'm sorry but even if there was a proven link between violence in the media and people doing bad things it would not be worth it to give up any freedom because of this. And yes the person is responsible for what they do. Otherwise all I have to do is have someone post a reply to this telling me to shoot you between the eyes and if I do so it is that persons fault because they incited me to do it:). Of course according to this it's all about the beer. And of course if you look at this and other stats like it during the 90s with all the violence in the media the crime rate has been going down. Let's see maybe crime has more to do with poverty and social justice and since the European countries in which crime is lower do a better job of taking care of the poor maybe that is the reason it is lower and not the censorship. I like the beer theory best myself. Now someone please tell me to go shoot this guy!
I'm sure if they really wanted to they could get the cash. I'm sure there are corps from places not in the US who would donate the money and landsharks to fight this. So once again the question does anyone know if the IETF really does have prior art or not. OTOH it may just be that they are using this as an excuse to come up with a better solution.
It has nothing to do with where the IETF is at. They want to create somthing that can be used everywhere. It just so happens that the US has stupid patent laws. This would be just as big a hurdle it the IETF was in europe.
If they can prove that they where working on this system before July 21 1999 then yes yes it would. I am assuming from the fact that they say in the article that they are not going to test this in the courts that they do not have really good proof of this. (Otherwise I can't think of any good reason they don't take thesee people to court.) And as much as I wish these people would FOAD it looks like this one would hold up.
here
you will see that this does in fact require the "Gold Pass" service. And that yes you do in fact have to have the non-free player to use the gold pass service.
Re:Why review a pocket reference (even a good one)
on
CVS Pocket Reference
·
· Score: 2
This is just the kind of thing for which safari. Is perfect. I'm talking work into paying for an account right now.
You (or whoever said that) have clearly not had a baby. You really do have to help them along with the concept. Granted it is perhaps 1-5 minutes and then they are good for life but they do have to be taught. Get a copy of "What to expect.." and you will see that I'm right. So all interfaces have to be learned. IMHO the only good interface is one that lets me make it work the way I want to do. But most things are really easy to work around.
I think you can rest assured that most likely everybody involved had their tounges firmly in their cheeks. I mean come on under illness TBD now that was funny.
Most likely 4.0.2 is in Woody right now and works great and it did not take that long to go from 4.0.1 to 4.0.2. So I would assume that this will be there pretty soon.
Linux and the x86 already do very well on the Intel based workstations that SGI sells now. That and on to your two other points if Apache is not enterprise-class what is? and since when is the Linux kernel "minimalist" have you looked at the feature list? or more likely are you just a stupid troll?
Only if they distribute it,selling machines with the code installed on it would count, besides SGI has shown many times that they get the GPL and like it. Look at the code that until recently they where sending back to the Apache project. You won't be able to afford one of these for awhile if you can't afford it now. The Octane under my desk still costs in the 10s of thousands of dollars range.
No no that is not at all what I said. In this case I said that I hoped SGI would port and put it on. Irix does somethings very nice but there are many things about it that I don't like. I do although think that if it ever goes on one of their MIPS based machines that they should tweak tune and port it (with help of course). This is also the course that I see them taking over the next few years. I did not suggest that we should take Irix off and replace it with something the community had built that would get ugly fast.
they do a better job with these then with the Intel based workstations they sell now. Which while pretty sweet machines when they are working tend to break (hardware) *much* more often than they should. What I would really like to see is a port of Linux to the MIPS based machines though. If SGI tweaked it all out that would be sweet.
Can you say prior art? This one is easy. The The coffee
cam went live in 1991 and the fish cam shortly after. Now it would be *really* nice if the coffe cam was before April 11. But failing that if the tech was common enough that a coffe cam was being set up there has to be a web server from before that date. They are saying that the coffe cam or any other web page would violate this. Do I get $10,000 now?:) Now does anybody know what day the coffe cam went live?
Slashdot Mirror
Then you have not meet any real libertarians. Allow me to explain. First of all Holmes was writing in dissent on that case. Keep that in mind . It is in fact fine to yell fire in a crowded theatre if as a result people die and there was not a fire then yes you were in the wrong. Encouraging someone to kill only causes real damage if and when someone tries to kill or does in fact kill that person and it can be proven that the person who killed that person in fact had no reasonable alternative but to kill that person because you said to. The theory behind the fire thing is that if you yell fire then most people will not have the time or tools to figure out if you are right or not and therefore you will cause them to do bad things. This was more true in Holmes' day due to the fact that theatres were likely to be on fire at that time. The fact of the matter is to prove this one you would have to prove that by someone posting something on the internet and a average resonable person looking at it would they be compelled to run out and do what it says with no thought on their own. I and every other livertarian that I know understand this fact. Most of us spend a large amount of time in these conversations debunking the "fire myth". So now do you understand? If not please ask me a question. :)
It is also important to note that Holmes was writing in dissent. It amazes me how many people do not know or ignore that fact.
That would be wrong. Justice Holmes wrote that opnion in dissent. The law in fact is such that you do have the right to yell fire in a theater. You may want to look here and here to understand why.
Ok so you think that just because some people have weak minds that the government should be allowed to control what we hear, see and say. Just throw think in there also. I'm sorry but even if there was a proven link between violence in the media and people doing bad things it would not be worth it to give up any freedom because of this. And yes the person is responsible for what they do. Otherwise all I have to do is have someone post a reply to this telling me to shoot you between the eyes and if I do so it is that persons fault because they incited me to do it :). Of course according to this it's all about the beer. And of course if you look at this and other stats like it during the 90s with all the violence in the media the crime rate has been going down. Let's see maybe crime has more to do with poverty and social justice and since the European countries in which crime is lower do a better job of taking care of the poor maybe that is the reason it is lower and not the censorship. I like the beer theory best myself. Now someone please tell me to go shoot this guy!
I'm sure if they really wanted to they could get the cash. I'm sure there are corps from places not in the US who would donate the money and landsharks to fight this. So once again the question does anyone know if the IETF really does have prior art or not. OTOH it may just be that they are using this as an excuse to come up with a better solution.
It has nothing to do with where the IETF is at. They want to create somthing that can be used everywhere. It just so happens that the US has stupid patent laws. This would be just as big a hurdle it the IETF was in europe.
If they can prove that they where working on this system before July 21 1999 then yes yes it would. I am assuming from the fact that they say in the article that they are not going to test this in the courts that they do not have really good proof of this. (Otherwise I can't think of any good reason they don't take thesee people to court.) And as much as I wish these people would FOAD it looks like this one would hold up.
Ok I'm going to feed the troll.
So you read all the code and compile it for security. And then you run telnet on the machine? LOL that was very funny.
Phantasy Star Online 2?
here you will see that this does in fact require the "Gold Pass" service. And that yes you do in fact have to have the non-free player to use the gold pass service.
This is just the kind of thing for which safari. Is perfect. I'm talking work into paying for an account right now.
at least from where I sit they are /.ed hard. I wonder if they are going to try and charge Rob for the bandwidth. Very funny.
Yes non-human computers. Go educate yourself on what the work computer meant before WW 2 and the comment will make sense. It is *very* accurate.
You (or whoever said that) have clearly not had a baby. You really do have to help them along with the concept. Granted it is perhaps 1-5 minutes and then they are good for life but they do have to be taught. Get a copy of "What to expect.." and you will see that I'm right. So all interfaces have to be learned. IMHO the only good interface is one that lets me make it work the way I want to do. But most things are really easy to work around.
I think you can rest assured that most likely everybody involved had their tounges firmly in their cheeks. I mean come on under illness TBD now that was funny.
I would really like to know how something like Debian fits into your world view?
Most likely 4.0.2 is in Woody right now and works great and it did not take that long to go from 4.0.1 to 4.0.2. So I would assume that this will be there pretty soon.
spammers should be put on their knees and shot in the back of the head.
Link please cause I've spent lots of time looking for it and can not find it.
Linux and the x86 already do very well on the Intel based workstations that SGI sells now. That and on to your two other points if Apache is not enterprise-class what is? and since when is the Linux kernel "minimalist" have you looked at the feature list? or more likely are you just a stupid troll?
Only if they distribute it ,selling machines with the code installed on it would count, besides SGI has shown many times that they get the GPL and like it. Look at the code that until recently they where sending back to the Apache project. You won't be able to afford one of these for awhile if you can't afford it now. The Octane under my desk still costs in the 10s of thousands of dollars range.
No no that is not at all what I said. In this case I said that I hoped SGI would port and put it on. Irix does somethings very nice but there are many things about it that I don't like. I do although think that if it ever goes on one of their MIPS based machines that they should tweak tune and port it (with help of course). This is also the course that I see them taking over the next few years. I did not suggest that we should take Irix off and replace it with something the community had built that would get ugly fast.
they do a better job with these then with the Intel based workstations they sell now. Which while pretty sweet machines when they are working tend to break (hardware) *much* more often than they should. What I would really like to see is a port of Linux to the MIPS based machines though. If SGI tweaked it all out that would be sweet.
Can you say prior art? This one is easy. The The coffee cam went live in 1991 and the fish cam shortly after. Now it would be *really* nice if the coffe cam was before April 11. But failing that if the tech was common enough that a coffe cam was being set up there has to be a web server from before that date. They are saying that the coffe cam or any other web page would violate this. :) Now does anybody know what day the coffe cam went live?
Do I get $10,000 now?
The newton was 1993 good idea though I had to do a google search to verify.