Germany never recognized the GDR and once the borders fell punished citizens of East Germany for things that were legal in the GDR but illegal in Germany.
That's not really true. Voting fraud was illegal in the GDR too. Shooting at unarmed people was illegal too. What other crimes do you have in mind?
For a deterrence to work, you have to be able to imagine the penalty to you. It's no problem to imagine paying a penalty of $1000 (and also to imagine the stuff you can't buy instead). It's also no problem to imagine being locked in a prison for a certain amount of time and not being able to walk where you want or get up when you want and choose the clothing you want etc.pp.
But it is psychologically impossible to imagine being killed. Because then you would have to imagine not being able to imagine anymore. So the death penalty is just a big abstractum to you. It has no touchable meaning for you. As long as you can remember, you were always there, and as long as you will be able to remember, you will be there. From your experience, you seem to have eternal life.
If you actually fear the afterlife, if you really fear being in Hell or Eternal Damnation or whatever your religion defines as the Big Bad Thing that gets the evildoers, death penalty might actually work work as a deterrence. But that requires you to be deeply religious and devout. And then it can work also in reverse: You just have to imagine that your planned deed is somehow holy and just. And then instead of a deterrence, sure death might even look positive.
That's for instance why the Taliban can muster so many suicide bombers. Probably not many of them are ready to go to prison for life. But confronting them with the big abstractum works, because you can fill the nothingness that is death with anything you want, also with 72 virgins. Instead of a deterrence the death is actually attractive to them.
Basicly you have no clue how death penalty works out in reality.
The Soviet Union in the late '70ies introduced the death penalty for rape. What was the result? The number of rapes did not go down. But the number of rapes where the victim got murdered afterwards shot up.
People defending the death penalty often seem to be under the impression that crime in the most cases is carried out because of lenghty thoughts and careful weighing of the pros and cons. It is not. And that makes the whole "deterrence" idea void.
No, the parent is correct. The lower price limit is always the cost to make the next copy. And this price is approaching zero.
Even with commercial entities this race to zero will happen. Software classes once sold for extra money will become addons, then free addons, and finally incorporated into the base product. Look at webbrowsers, music players or even at stuff like network ports or sound! At least for the last two it has not even to do with open source or free software, but it still happened.
And there is no reason the price for a certain software solution should be always non zero. The amount of work that has to go into creating a certain functionality in software is reaching zero too. Once it was a big effort to come up with Quicksort. But today you just write sort() somewhere in your code. Software is the ideal accumulator of work: Our body of software incorporates all the work that ever went into creating it and allows us to benefit from it basicly for ever. This software once was paid for: With inspiration, with creativity, with work, with nightly testing sessions, with lots of debugging, and with correction and extension and universalisation.
But now this price is paid. Why should anyone still pay the full price, if the work has amortized long ago?
In the Brothers Grimm's fairy tale the frog never got kissed. The princess threw him against the wall, cursing him (yes, I have the german original here;) ).
>I know TCP/IP is a standardized protocol, which was my point. If it had been GPL software, it would have gone nowhere because companies wouldn't have adopted it in the early days of the Internet.
But TCP/IP is a protocol, it can never be GPL. GPL covers software. So this comparision is somewhat wrongfooted. There are protocols that were first implemented in GPLed software, but here we have a strong point pro GPL (and in this case other open source licenses): You can easily code your own software according to the protocol, and use the GPLed implementation to test your implementation. And you can sell your implementation with whatever license you want. You can even distribute one part of your system with GPLed software (lets say, the server), and distribute your part (the client) with another license. Because they are separate programs connected via a welldocumented protocol, the GPL actually encourages this (see the GNU FAQ for details.)
I took 2006 because that was the point in time when the media started to really question the legacy of George W. Bush. After three years of Iraq war and no real achievement there (overthrowing Saddam Hussein was no achievement, it would have happened anyway, because he was no longer able to feed his inner party circle and became more and more detached), people got nervous, and this showed up in the media, leading to the big offset in the 2006 elections.
Of course, it won't be portrayed that way. The press will never jump on Obama's every misspoken word, or call out every contradiction in his policy. No, I expect that the press will go right on supporting this guy through thick and thin because they're married to him now.
And that is different to the Bush presidency between 2001 and 2006 exactly how?
I was hoping for a Bush win in 2004 for a simple reason: I wanted him to be president when the whole shit was stinking even up the noses of the big media. I wanted him to be president when it became clear to even the last and hardboiled conservative that President Bush was a failure. I wanted an actual reporting in the daily news how bad a president was in power.
Sometimes I am really wondering about the antipathy against something that is perceived "socialized medicine". For some reason the U.S. has the most expensive and the least efficient health care system of all developed nations. In parts it is not even effective, e.g. not providing all U.S. citizens with even basic health services. For a visitor of Earth, who doesn't look too deeply into the inner workings, he has to be under the impression that, given normal economic theories, the U.S. one is the most socialist system and the other nations have market driven ones (Ok... UK might be in a hard competition for place one in this race;) ). But whenever someone is barely suggesting, one could have a look how other nations organize health care and at least pondering some ideas, he gets shout down with "Communism! Socialism!" immediately. So it's better to have a lower life expectancy, a higher child mortality rate and a bigger fiscal burden, and be ideologically pure than just implementing something that has been proven to actually work?
I wonder how this should work in countries which use the Berne Convention. Because there you are either the Author, or you aren't. You can't sign away Author's Right (not even as Work for Hire). All you could do is give a permission for distribution, but then the distributor has to give you compensation.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's called "Bulette im BrÃtchen" (rissole-in-a-bun).
Just write a program that calculates Graham's Number or even the Small Veblen Ordinal, and your virtual memory gets exhausted very easily.
Germany never recognized the GDR and once the borders fell punished citizens of East Germany for things that were legal in the GDR but illegal in Germany.
That's not really true. Voting fraud was illegal in the GDR too. Shooting at unarmed people was illegal too.
What other crimes do you have in mind?
No, the problem lies somewhat deeper.
For a deterrence to work, you have to be able to imagine the penalty to you. It's no problem to imagine paying a penalty of $1000 (and also to imagine the stuff you can't buy instead). It's also no problem to imagine being locked in a prison for a certain amount of time and not being able to walk where you want or get up when you want and choose the clothing you want etc.pp.
But it is psychologically impossible to imagine being killed. Because then you would have to imagine not being able to imagine anymore. So the death penalty is just a big abstractum to you. It has no touchable meaning for you. As long as you can remember, you were always there, and as long as you will be able to remember, you will be there. From your experience, you seem to have eternal life.
If you actually fear the afterlife, if you really fear being in Hell or Eternal Damnation or whatever your religion defines as the Big Bad Thing that gets the evildoers, death penalty might actually work work as a deterrence. But that requires you to be deeply religious and devout. And then it can work also in reverse: You just have to imagine that your planned deed is somehow holy and just. And then instead of a deterrence, sure death might even look positive.
That's for instance why the Taliban can muster so many suicide bombers. Probably not many of them are ready to go to prison for life. But confronting them with the big abstractum works, because you can fill the nothingness that is death with anything you want, also with 72 virgins. Instead of a deterrence the death is actually attractive to them.
Basicly you have no clue how death penalty works out in reality.
The Soviet Union in the late '70ies introduced the death penalty for rape. What was the result? The number of rapes did not go down. But the number of rapes where the victim got murdered afterwards shot up.
People defending the death penalty often seem to be under the impression that crime in the most cases is carried out because of lenghty thoughts and careful weighing of the pros and cons. It is not. And that makes the whole "deterrence" idea void.
The death penalty does not deterr crime. Period.
No, the parent is correct. The lower price limit is always the cost to make the next copy. And this price is approaching zero.
Even with commercial entities this race to zero will happen. Software classes once sold for extra money will become addons, then free addons, and finally incorporated into the base product. Look at webbrowsers, music players or even at stuff like network ports or sound! At least for the last two it has not even to do with open source or free software, but it still happened.
And there is no reason the price for a certain software solution should be always non zero. The amount of work that has to go into creating a certain functionality in software is reaching zero too. Once it was a big effort to come up with Quicksort. But today you just write sort() somewhere in your code. Software is the ideal accumulator of work: Our body of software incorporates all the work that ever went into creating it and allows us to benefit from it basicly for ever. This software once was paid for: With inspiration, with creativity, with work, with nightly testing sessions, with lots of debugging, and with correction and extension and universalisation.
But now this price is paid. Why should anyone still pay the full price, if the work has amortized long ago?
That was one of the problems: The virus scanner was completely outdated at the school.
So you know what Apple is trying to avoid :)
If Apple would simply allow their OS to run on generic PCs, Microsoft would have a true competitor.
If Apple would allow their OS to run on generic PCs, they would fall into a support hell.
s/Viruses are some/A successful virus is one/g
PS: Do avoid a plural of virus at all cost. The latin word virus is a singularitantum and has no latin plural.
It in fact didn't.
In the Brothers Grimm's fairy tale the frog never got kissed. The princess threw him against the wall, cursing him (yes, I have the german original here ;) ).
No, I called it a data and application agnostic specification for how office applications should interact with each other, as my parent called it.
That's what CORBA and KParts are for.
About 22 m/s ;)
Actually, the iPod wasn't the gagdet which popularized the iSomething. The iMac predates it for about three years.
>I know TCP/IP is a standardized protocol, which was my point. If it had been GPL software, it would have gone nowhere because companies wouldn't have adopted it in the early days of the Internet.
But TCP/IP is a protocol, it can never be GPL. GPL covers software. So this comparision is somewhat wrongfooted.
There are protocols that were first implemented in GPLed software, but here we have a strong point pro GPL (and in this case other open source licenses): You can easily code your own software according to the protocol, and use the GPLed implementation to test your implementation. And you can sell your implementation with whatever license you want. You can even distribute one part of your system with GPLed software (lets say, the server), and distribute your part (the client) with another license. Because they are separate programs connected via a welldocumented protocol, the GPL actually encourages this (see the GNU FAQ for details.)
I took 2006 because that was the point in time when the media started to really question the legacy of George W. Bush. After three years of Iraq war and no real achievement there (overthrowing Saddam Hussein was no achievement, it would have happened anyway, because he was no longer able to feed his inner party circle and became more and more detached), people got nervous, and this showed up in the media, leading to the big offset in the 2006 elections.
It is probably a thing of contrast: Compared with the Bush before him and the Bush after him, 1992-2000 was a good time for the U.S.
As they say: Between blinds, the one-eyed is king.
Of course, it won't be portrayed that way. The press will never jump on Obama's every misspoken word, or call out every contradiction in his policy. No, I expect that the press will go right on supporting this guy through thick and thin because they're married to him now.
And that is different to the Bush presidency between 2001 and 2006 exactly how?
I was hoping for a Bush win in 2004 for a simple reason: I wanted him to be president when the whole shit was stinking even up the noses of the big media. I wanted him to be president when it became clear to even the last and hardboiled conservative that President Bush was a failure. I wanted an actual reporting in the daily news how bad a president was in power.
The EU has more inhabitants than the U.S., and about everyone in the EU is covered by universal health care. So that argument doesn't hold.
Sometimes I am really wondering about the antipathy against something that is perceived "socialized medicine". ;) ).
For some reason the U.S. has the most expensive and the least efficient health care system of all developed nations. In parts it is not even effective, e.g. not providing all U.S. citizens with even basic health services.
For a visitor of Earth, who doesn't look too deeply into the inner workings, he has to be under the impression that, given normal economic theories, the U.S. one is the most socialist system and the other nations have market driven ones (Ok... UK might be in a hard competition for place one in this race
But whenever someone is barely suggesting, one could have a look how other nations organize health care and at least pondering some ideas, he gets shout down with "Communism! Socialism!" immediately. So it's better to have a lower life expectancy, a higher child mortality rate and a bigger fiscal burden, and be ideologically pure than just implementing something that has been proven to actually work?
I wonder how this should work in countries which use the Berne Convention. Because there you are either the Author, or you aren't. You can't sign away Author's Right (not even as Work for Hire).
All you could do is give a permission for distribution, but then the distributor has to give you compensation.
It's a necessity if you want to position Windows 7 as a host OS for a blade center. Blade centers can host more than 64 cores very easily.
Everything that involves schlittern (sliding) has a sexual connotation ;)
A Schlitterbahn is just an iced puddle, where you run, jump on and schlitter (slide) along...