It's a minority in the sense that the minority of Americans are Christian. It's also arguable that the majority religion is Athiesm (of course this is a whole discussion in and of itself).
Yes but you talk about this like it's news. It ain't! Thins kind of stuff happens over in the Middle East everyday!
Definatly not to this magnatude or sophistication. Sure, maybe a bomb that kills 30 people on a bus (which is horrible and tragic), but that doesn't take a huge operation. Also, you are talking about countries that are actively at war with other countries, so a lot of military is involved. Essentially, you're talking night and day to what's just happened in the US.
Well, of course it was RELIGION. But some people forget that religion A != religion B. To assume that religion, in and of itself, is the root of this evil, is a sign of crass incompetance and illogic. A better stance would be to accuse "unsubstantiated religious dogma", which is what also drove the nazis, among others.
Of course, this thought keeps getting modded down as a troll by a few brainwashed sheep... but go ahead and mod me down, I've got plenty of karma to kill...
Since I'm the one paying for my connection to the Internet, and all of the traffic on that connection, I have the right to decide what content is appropriate
EXACTLY! You have the RIGHT to decide if their ads are not the type of content you want on your pipe - don't go to their site and you won't see the ads. You're argument is like stating, "I shouldn't have to pay for this book, I have the RIGHT to view this book, so I'm going to steal it".
It's not your right to circumvent their revenue model Do you really believe that you have some God Given Right to have access to a website's content? If you want their content, you have to agree to their revenue model to use it (monthly subscription fee, advertising, etc.) If a site requires a $10 monthly fee, is it okay to hack an account on their system? Filtering ads is no different.
Note to moderators, I just got modded down for a legit post in this thread - please do not mod based on personal opinion or bias.
I wish sites would realize that pissing off their viewers with popups and big honking ads,...
It's not the web that's annoying, it's the sites that you visit.
I hate commercials on TV, but they have to pay for the content. Therefore, I stopped watching, but I don't complain about it - there's no point. Who likes popups? You could use technology to circumvent them, but this is unethical at best.
Anybody think Microsoft is going to be any more open source on hardware than they are on software.
You must not be talking about WinCE (I know, it's "Shared Source", not GPL'd), The.NET CLR (Read: their next generation development platform), or C#. Your argument is like saying that because Sony doesn't release their proprietary software that they put on their laptops, that their TV's will not come with and technical documentation.
It's all a nice thought, but you're absolutly right. Both companies have tailored their *nix systems for their hardware, and I highly doubt that they will move away from this.
You are making the same horrible assumption that the Slashdot headline makes. This is a complex issue, and many (pro|anti|neutral M$) agree that splitting the company up will do nothing positive in the long term, and that a more innovative solution needs to be formed. So the DOJ is finally being smart about this whole MS fiasco and dropping an ill-thought solution. Now, it's time to regulate their OEM restrictions and EULA's, and time to stop whining about how IE, Windows Media Player, and MS Movie Maker is putting Netscape, Real, and Adobe (Premier) out of their respective markets.
Slashdot's database was hosed from sometime around 7 AM EDT
Sorry, but in lieu of this thread, I just HAVE to troll:)...
If you had been running MSSQL server this would be a non-issue.
Re:First question
on
MenuetOS Debuts
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The problem is, this OS's codebase will not scale due to the fact that it will be nearly impossible to debug once it get's the size of... two floppies.
What? This is anti-US/M$ trolling. I have a passport account and I hardly had to give ANY private information. Name/Address/Email. That's it. Medical information? You can't be serious? And yes, our privacy laws need work, but "piss-porest"? Unsubstantied uneducated hogwash.
Passport, or a similar concept, is still needed. Customers want it. If a user has to have 10 different logins, they may:
1. Use the same password on all 10 anyway
2. Use grossly easy passwords so that they can remember them
3. A combo of 1 and 2.
With a Passport like concept, there's only one account to remember. Maybe then consumers will find it reasonable to memorize a secure password. Either way, a centralized system is needed for identification. As a web developer for 5+ years, customers don't want to fill out the same crap each time they visit a site, and if they could just type in their passport info to authorize access to certain private information, they'd do it. Now, it's up to us to come do the social and technological engineering to make this happen safely, and securely.
You're absolutly right. And the government has NO RIGHT saying that your son can't be sacrificed for medical research to save MILLIONS of lives. Hey, it's just ONE person to save a MILLION!
First, I never said I was against it, I said that it was a moral struggle. Second, there's definately no garuntee that stem cell research will lead to cures. Third, your logic is flawed. Example: Why don't we just use organs and tissue from death row inmates for research that helps cure AIDS. (This is an ANALOGY not a DIRECT COMPARISON - I'm not comparing it directly to stem cell research). The ends don't justify the means.
P.S. Parkinson's has been a genetic disease in my family and I have a very high chance of getting it, and have lost family members to it. Don't start making trolling assumptions as if these serious diseases don't affect my life as well.
Driven by ignorance, conservative thinking and fear of the unknown, our political leaders have undertaken to make laws that suppress this type of research.
Ok, so if you are liberal, your thoughts are OK because you are OPEN. But if you are conservative, you're thinking is CLOSED? If you're open to diversity of opinion, then you must accept ALL types of thinking! Bush (not my favorite president to say the least) was struggling with some legitimate moral issues regarding stem cells from aborted fetus. Honestly, I'm sick of people doing things "in the name of science" and calling all moral discussions "ignorant". I don't stand on either side of the stem cell issue, as I have yet to fully understand the moral implications (if any). However, I would say that it's ignorant to scoff those who are attempting to excercise discernment.
I just want to say that this really boils down to MS Outlook's rediculous security model. I have been using Windows since Win95 and DOS before hand, I've NEVER installed a virus shield as I hate TSR's, and I've NEVER gotten one of these silly virus's. I've also NEVER installed Outlook on my machine. MS should be ashamed of itself, but at the same time, to say that Windows == Easy Virii Breading Ground is unfounded.
I think that was my first point - just keep building version A. The legality is in question, IMHO, because version B uses GPL'd source, which means it must be GPL'd as well, right?
So, get the latest GPL'd version and let's branch off and finish it ourselves. They can't legally take an existing codebase and un-GPL it. If so, then the GPL is worthless, because a company can just release a free codebase, wait until everyone uses it, and then commercialize it. Hogwash!
Slashdot Mirror
It's a minority in the sense that the minority of Americans are Christian. It's also arguable that the majority religion is Athiesm (of course this is a whole discussion in and of itself).
Yes but you talk about this like it's news. It ain't! Thins kind of stuff happens over in the Middle East everyday!
Definatly not to this magnatude or sophistication. Sure, maybe a bomb that kills 30 people on a bus (which is horrible and tragic), but that doesn't take a huge operation. Also, you are talking about countries that are actively at war with other countries, so a lot of military is involved. Essentially, you're talking night and day to what's just happened in the US.
Oh... my... gosh. Are people really this stupid?
Well, of course it was RELIGION. But some people forget that religion A != religion B. To assume that religion, in and of itself, is the root of this evil, is a sign of crass incompetance and illogic. A better stance would be to accuse "unsubstantiated religious dogma", which is what also drove the nazis, among others.
Of course, this thought keeps getting modded down as a troll by a few brainwashed sheep... but go ahead and mod me down, I've got plenty of karma to kill...
Since I'm the one paying for my connection to the Internet, and all of the traffic on that connection, I have the right to decide what content is appropriate
EXACTLY! You have the RIGHT to decide if their ads are not the type of content you want on your pipe - don't go to their site and you won't see the ads. You're argument is like stating, "I shouldn't have to pay for this book, I have the RIGHT to view this book, so I'm going to steal it".
It's not your right to circumvent their revenue model Do you really believe that you have some God Given Right to have access to a website's content? If you want their content, you have to agree to their revenue model to use it (monthly subscription fee, advertising, etc.) If a site requires a $10 monthly fee, is it okay to hack an account on their system? Filtering ads is no different.
Note to moderators, I just got modded down for a legit post in this thread - please do not mod based on personal opinion or bias.
I wish sites would realize that pissing off their viewers with popups and big honking ads,...
It's not the web that's annoying, it's the sites that you visit.
I hate commercials on TV, but they have to pay for the content. Therefore, I stopped watching, but I don't complain about it - there's no point. Who likes popups? You could use technology to circumvent them, but this is unethical at best.
This post should be modded +10, EXACTLY.
Anybody think Microsoft is going to be any more open source on hardware than they are on software.
.NET CLR (Read: their next generation development platform), or C#. Your argument is like saying that because Sony doesn't release their proprietary software that they put on their laptops, that their TV's will not come with and technical documentation.
You must not be talking about WinCE (I know, it's "Shared Source", not GPL'd), The
My sig says it all...
It's all a nice thought, but you're absolutly right. Both companies have tailored their *nix systems for their hardware, and I highly doubt that they will move away from this.
You are making the same horrible assumption that the Slashdot headline makes. This is a complex issue, and many (pro|anti|neutral M$) agree that splitting the company up will do nothing positive in the long term, and that a more innovative solution needs to be formed. So the DOJ is finally being smart about this whole MS fiasco and dropping an ill-thought solution. Now, it's time to regulate their OEM restrictions and EULA's, and time to stop whining about how IE, Windows Media Player, and MS Movie Maker is putting Netscape, Real, and Adobe (Premier) out of their respective markets.
Slashdot's database was hosed from sometime around 7 AM EDT
:)...
Sorry, but in lieu of this thread, I just HAVE to troll
If you had been running MSSQL server this would be a non-issue.
The problem is, this OS's codebase will not scale due to the fact that it will be nearly impossible to debug once it get's the size of... two floppies.
... but it weighs in a 315lbs and has an impact of 10,000 ft lbs... YIKES!
We should expect the same level of quality and performance in software we demand in physical construction.
Consumers are not willing to pay for such quality, or wait for it.
What? This is anti-US/M$ trolling. I have a passport account and I hardly had to give ANY private information. Name/Address/Email. That's it. Medical information? You can't be serious? And yes, our privacy laws need work, but "piss-porest"? Unsubstantied uneducated hogwash.
Passport, or a similar concept, is still needed. Customers want it. If a user has to have 10 different logins, they may:
1. Use the same password on all 10 anyway
2. Use grossly easy passwords so that they can remember them
3. A combo of 1 and 2.
With a Passport like concept, there's only one account to remember. Maybe then consumers will find it reasonable to memorize a secure password. Either way, a centralized system is needed for identification. As a web developer for 5+ years, customers don't want to fill out the same crap each time they visit a site, and if they could just type in their passport info to authorize access to certain private information, they'd do it. Now, it's up to us to come do the social and technological engineering to make this happen safely, and securely.
You're absolutly right. And the government has NO RIGHT saying that your son can't be sacrificed for medical research to save MILLIONS of lives. Hey, it's just ONE person to save a MILLION!
First, I never said I was against it, I said that it was a moral struggle. Second, there's definately no garuntee that stem cell research will lead to cures. Third, your logic is flawed. Example: Why don't we just use organs and tissue from death row inmates for research that helps cure AIDS. (This is an ANALOGY not a DIRECT COMPARISON - I'm not comparing it directly to stem cell research). The ends don't justify the means.
P.S. Parkinson's has been a genetic disease in my family and I have a very high chance of getting it, and have lost family members to it. Don't start making trolling assumptions as if these serious diseases don't affect my life as well.
Not all Christians are fundamentalists (Thank God). (Stem Cell == Evil) is not Christan Dogma.
Driven by ignorance, conservative thinking and fear of the unknown, our political leaders have undertaken to make laws that suppress this type of research.
Ok, so if you are liberal, your thoughts are OK because you are OPEN. But if you are conservative, you're thinking is CLOSED? If you're open to diversity of opinion, then you must accept ALL types of thinking! Bush (not my favorite president to say the least) was struggling with some legitimate moral issues regarding stem cells from aborted fetus. Honestly, I'm sick of people doing things "in the name of science" and calling all moral discussions "ignorant". I don't stand on either side of the stem cell issue, as I have yet to fully understand the moral implications (if any). However, I would say that it's ignorant to scoff those who are attempting to excercise discernment.
I just want to say that this really boils down to MS Outlook's rediculous security model. I have been using Windows since Win95 and DOS before hand, I've NEVER installed a virus shield as I hate TSR's, and I've NEVER gotten one of these silly virus's. I've also NEVER installed Outlook on my machine. MS should be ashamed of itself, but at the same time, to say that Windows == Easy Virii Breading Ground is unfounded.
I think that was my first point - just keep building version A. The legality is in question, IMHO, because version B uses GPL'd source, which means it must be GPL'd as well, right?
So, get the latest GPL'd version and let's branch off and finish it ourselves. They can't legally take an existing codebase and un-GPL it. If so, then the GPL is worthless, because a company can just release a free codebase, wait until everyone uses it, and then commercialize it. Hogwash!
Not quite. Two simple points prove this statement wrong: