not the software, and for the services they are entitled to demand whatever concessions they think the market will bear
Remember, be carefull now, that at one time, this is what was said about Software Licenses.
at one time people thought, "who cares what the software license is, its their copyright, they can make any changes that the 'market will bear'" -- this lead to the GNU Revolution you are presently seeing. Most people would have prefered it was unnecessary, to wrestle back control of Computer Software from profiteers in order that an open dialogue amoungst programmers, technologists, researchers and users could take place... all comprimised by myopic Free Market Zealots.
Let profit makers comprimise your rights today, and others will do it tomorrow. RedHat, IBM, AT&T whomever -- they will stretch the bounds *together* until all Licenses are so onerous that you'll think you were living in a Corporate State. Sound ridiculous? Witness what the RIAA/MPAA/BSA/??? does in order to control their IP via "Optional Licenses" -- basically your option is "live in a dark cave" or "accept your A$$ pucking slave". Just remember what RMS did as a response to a closed source printer driver will not always work... the computer world is managing to wrestle control from powerfull corporations this time, but *in the future* this will not always work. Not every 'industry' or 'situation' is equal. Music might do it (destroy the RIAA), but will TV? Movies? Books?
Bottom line: Shame on RedHat -- no For-Profit entity has any right whatsoever to demand sight audits or any other. If you want to have a adversarial(sp?) relationship with the world, keep right at it...
They dumped Corel Linux in an effort to re-align themselves to their (then) new investment from MS, and MS promised them a role in.NET.
MS dumps Corel -- now where are they? Being bought out by some VCs? If COREL had stuck with Corel Linux, they could have used WordPerfect and Corel Office to drive the enterprise GNU/Linux adoption... they would be what Lindows so desperatly wants -- and still be able to compete w/ RedHat et al.
Leaving GNU/Linux was Corel's worst mistake in the last 5 years.
You know what, im sick of this 'unprofessional' trash. "Professional" is inhuman. Usually, any act of honesty is described as 'unprofessional' Im tired of my personal relations being filtered through the Blanket-of-Commerce that requires people to be a cog or a tool.
I could care less that a person was 'unprofessional' -- because a person's character is not defined by how well he conforms to his employers view of how best to achieve profit.
Justin has grown tired of being a wage-slave -- so have I.. I just dont have the resources to buy life back from my Corporate Masters just yet...
Freedom fighters eh? Methinks that some folks 'round here take this stuff a tad seriously
When the whole of ComputerDom has no viable alternative to MS's DRM-enabled, closed sourced OS & Apps, you will be thankfull people have been writing GNU/Linux.
The alternative is to stifle and choke the future of computing -- and the opportunity for dialogue, entertainment, democracy and commerce it provides.
Did you *read* the article? The gas primarily enourages fuel-efficiency, not density. And, sorry, property taxes MOST certainly do not encourage density. Suburbs enjoy a nice unburdened fresh-slate to escape taxes by building houses in former meadows/farmland/woods/etc.
Suburbs dont pay for the services suburbanites use. Suburbanites live as nats-on-the-arse of cities by using services (highways to work, parks, arenas, museams, galleries, symphonies, etc) they dont pay for.
Terrific Idea! While Im not partial to being 'tracked' (this btw, is not what they are suggesting -- to build a "where is John Doe system" -- a system could be contstructed to PREVENT such misuse) BUT this solves many Car-Centric Culture Problems:
Non-car owners dont pay for roads. Only users pay (this includes transport)
SPRAWL IS REDUCED(!) Sprawl causes car-centered communities that are inhuman in scale and design. Sprawl is VERY expensive. Increase in service areas (water/elec/snow removal/etc/etc), road construction, policing. This also provides a climate where denisty is encouraged -- leaving habitat more protected for plant and animals. Humans spreading out everywhere in suburbs causes much habitat loss. Paying for *the miles you drive* encourages you to DRIVE LESS.
While I dont agree that a 100% shift should occur, the tax should be collected 50% gas (encourage fuelefficiency) and 50% travel (enourage density).
ONTARIO: ARE YOU LISTENING?
reposted at the expense of my karma to thwart abuse of the moderator system.
The "curb urban sprawl" people are only trying to protect the value of their urban property.
yes, exactly!* Not just their individual property-values, but the currentinvestment in the communities in general. The roads already constucted, libraries, police stations, firestations, schools etc. When you spread the cities out all over, you increase the distance to these places -- making them less available/effective to everyone. Suburbs 'cling' of the services supplied by cities. Those cities provide jobs (and maintain the services to these commercial enterprises) while suburbs reap the taxes from their 'cheaply-serviced' residences. Suburbs have little public-service, libraries, museums, artgalleries, sports facilities etc. Suburbs/Cities are really, functionally, ONE community -- why the tax/spending/cost seperation? The poor balance means that city residents "subsidize" suburbanites by paying taxes to support these services.
Increase in policing due to suburbs? You must be joking.
You might be surprised to hear this, but "urban-crime" is caused by poverty -- not geography. When people 'abandon' the city to move to the suburbs, they leave failed communities in their wake. Where this under-class is left to without much opportunity. When people flee to the 'burbs, they *cause* dicay -- they are not fleeing from it, but really causing it.
By encouraging re-use of urban space you protect against this devistation, more balanced and healthy communities for everyone.
BTW, when i said "increase in police spending" i meant it in a 'all things being equal situation' -- that by increasing the SPACE to be policed (both of crime prevention and road-safety/law enforcment) you increase the cost.
One final note, the people who DISMISS the anti-sprawl advocates are trying to protect their development-profit-dollars.
Except you ignored my point and didnt read (comprehend) the article.
#1) Sprawl is bad. Sprawl is discouraged with this scheme. #2) Your gas tax (in oregon at least) only pays 70% of the cost of roads. The other 30% comes from Non-gas taxes. People who *dont* drive at all are paying that 30% -- bad again. #3) The article states that revenue decreases with fuel efficiency, people are loath to increase the gas tax, revenue for roads must be maintained, so the shortfall must be made-up. One way to do this is per-mile charges. What im saying is that this gives you the added beneift of actually REDUCING road-related expense by discouraging needless road-building *and* protect natural/unused spaces (a 'free' bonus to protect the environment).
This is one of the best ideas ive heard in a long while.. fair, practical and loads of benefits.
Terrific Idea! While Im not partial to being 'tracked' (this btw, is not what they are suggesting -- to build a "where is John Doe system" -- a system could be contstructed to PREVENT such misuse) BUT this solves many Car-Centric Culture Problems:
Non-car owners dont pay for roads. Only users pay (this includes transport)
SPRAWL IS REDUCED(!)Sprawl causes car-centered communities that are inhuman in scale and design. Sprawl is VERY expensive. Increase in service areas (water/elec/snow removal/etc/etc), road construction, policing. This also provides a climate where denisty is encouraged -- leaving habitat more protected for plant and animals. Humans spreading out everywhere in suburbs causes much habitat loss. Paying for *the miles you drive* encourages you to DRIVE LESS.
While I dont agree that a 100% shift should occur, the tax should be collected 50% gas (encourage fuelefficiency) and 50% travel (enourage density).
when they put a translucent case around it and put a little apple logo on it, expect the AppleTablet to cost $4600. Lignux on a $2600 Acer sounds much better - Lignux on a $1500 laptop -- better yet.
If you used something like the dalas-semi one-wire i button stuff, (see here) i bet you could do just that...
Re:Guinness for IT strength!
on
PeltierBeer
·
· Score: 1
GW Bush: Facing the threat of Islamic extremism head on When the BushLeague gets the whole if Islam united and fully pissed at the good ol'USA, your going to have antoher dualism ala cold-war on your hands - but instead of being interested in a stale-mate, the muslims ill be 2billion interested in blowing themselves up on main street usa.
The War Against Reason^H^H^H^H^H^HTerror is going to turn USofA into Isreal.
Want to address religious fundies? start at home w/ BushCo's right-wing christian reformists who rule your domestic social agenda - religious fundies of all stripes (both muslims abroad and baptists in the USA) will be the death of us all.
Want to address islamic fascism? teach the world to read -- a f' of alot cheaper than the $400billion the USA is going to gift to the Military-Industrial Complex next year.
The War on Terror is guaranteed to be as big a sucess as the War on Drugs -- only the stakes are bigger!
the guiness-in-a-can that ive tried at a local coffe/bar (we meet there after critical-mass.org rides once a month.. not my venue of choice (as it requires drinking beers-in-a-can at all) but i digress..)... anyway, this guiness (in ontario, canada) has a simple round-floating-ball inside.
ive had two cans, and the head was terrific for a canned beer -- i did expect there had been some pressurized vessel of sorts inside, but a friend with me there assured me it was not the case... he *had* opened a can up to have a look at the goings-on within, and assured me that it was just a small floating sphere -- he was also expecting some clever co2 release scheme...
So, inside *these* cans is just a floating ball (ive been told) and no co2 release scheme at all... bottome line: is there TWO different draught-guiness-in-a-can things going on here? one with a floating ball and another like *youve* been given? have *you* opened up a can and had a look inside?
What exactly is stopping, say... the janitor of Time-Warner getting drunk and selling me the entire company for $1?
1) That the janitor has no *reasonable* belief that he is acting within his mandate and 2) the purchaser, has no reasonable belief that this janitor has this authority.
Except that the person, was an agent of Nullsoft - agents of commercial entities *are* legally capable of entering into an license agreement. This protects the 2nd party (in this case the public) from Businesses backing out of a 'deal' saying "this person didnt have the right to obligate us" - in fact, (s)he does.
imagine if some 3rd party came down on a seperate department (and previously unaware of this project) AOL for WASTE, maybe AOL's employees HAD discussed the matter with the people in their immediate sphere of relevance... all was well. teh decision to publish (and enter into the GPL license with the public) -- they cannot simply say "oh, we were just kidding". becasuse we, the public, had every reason to believe that the Nullsoft fellows had the authority (as they must have, in order to publish).
Most cities have flattened out into suburban sprawl.
Which itself is 95% of the "transportation problem" -- people spreading out across the landscape needlessly.
if there was greater density in NorthAmerican ciites, we could EASILY cut down our pollution drastically if mixed-use development, and high-density residences were encouraged. Sprawl wastes tax money (increased services, useless road cleaning/building, etc) NOT just pollution and environmental disaster...
James Bamford writes in Body of Secrets (2001) that this "may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government."
TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF WASHINGTON 25, D.C. 13 March 1962 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE Subject: Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba (TS)
1. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attached Memorandum for the Chief of Operations., Cuba Project, which responds to a request of that office for brief but precise description of pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba. 2. The Joint Chiefs of Staff recommend that the proposed memorandum be forwarded as a preliminary submission suitable for planning purposes. It is assumed that there will be similar submissions from other agencies and that these inputs will be used as a basis for developing a time-phased plan. Individual projects can then be considered on a case-by-case basis. 3. Further, it is assumed that a single agency will be given the primary responsibility for developing military and para-military aspects of the basic plan. It is recommended that this responsibility for both overt and covert military operations be assigned the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
For the Joint Chiefs of Staff: [Signature] L.L. LEMNITZER Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
1 Enclosure memo for Chief of Operations., Cuba Project
SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEWED BY JCS ON 21 May 84 CLASSIFICATION CONTINUED EXCLUDED FROM GDS EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING: DOD DIR 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED COPY NO. 1 SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION TOP SECRET JCS 1969/321 12 March-1962 Page 2165 NOTE BY THE SECRETARIES to the JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF on NORTHWOODS (S) A report* on the above Subject is submitted for consideration by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. F. J. BLOUIN M. J. INGELIDO Joint Secretariat * Not reproduced herewith; on file in Joint Secretariat EXCLUDED FROM GDS EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING: DOD DIR 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY TOP SECRET JCS 1969/321 2165 UNCLASSIFIED TOP SECRET TOP SECRET UNCLASSIFIED COPY NO. 1 SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION TOP SECRET JCS 1969/321 14 March-1962 Page 2165 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF DECISION ON JCS 1969/321 A Note by the Secretaries on NORTHWOODS (S) Note by the Secretaries
1. At their meeting on 13 March 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved the recommendations in paragraph 8 of JCS 1969/321.
2. In that the Commandant had expressed direct concern of the Marine Corps in this matter, the provisions of Title 10, US Code 141 (6), applied and were followed.
3. This decision now becomes a part of and shall be attached as the top sheet of JCS 1969/321.
F. J. BLOUIN M. J. INGELIDO Joint Secretariat
SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEWED BY JCS ON 21 May 84 CLASSIFICATION CONTINUED
EXCLUDED FROM GDS EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING: DOD DIR 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY
UNCLASSIFIED [12 pages; classification stamps same on all pages, omitted after first page.]
TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED COPY _____ OF _____ COPIES SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION 9 March 1962
REPORT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF REPRESENTATIVE ON THE CARIBBEAN SURVEY GROUP to the JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF on CUBA PROJECT (TS)
The Chief of Operations, Cuba ProJect, has requested that he be furnished the views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on this matter by 13 March 1962.
EXCLUDED FROM GDS UNCLASSIFIED TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN
JUSTIFICATION FOR US MILITARY INTERVENTION IN CUBA (TS)
THE PROBLEM
1. As requested* by Chief of Operations, Cuba Project, the Joint Chiefs of Staff are to indicate brief but precise description of
Don't tread on me... it's not just a cute saying on a flag - it requires backbone. So, your saying that being a bully is a good thing? cant comprimise so you resort to violence? is *this* how things should be run?
I don't agree. Everything needs to be marketed. Giving something a name with negative connotations slows acceptance, or may even stop it. They want users don't they?
I dont agree, giving "marketing" too much weight is folly -- *I* dont consider it, actually, I am repulsed by Advertising and Marketing as intentional manipulation -- if you must resort to attempting to manipulate(lie) about something you are not honest enough for me to have a relationship (..like use your product for example.)
Things (ideas/products/works/art/whatever) either stand on their merit or they do not, no amount of marketing changes that. Unless, of course, you are irrational and easily influenced...
ive noticed that winamp3 on xp doesnt have the same WOW that it did over other apps like it in the 1 & 2 series days... ive become disenchanted with it (a bit unstable/unweildly(sp?) -- what mp3/ogg/media player do you use on Windows? something without to much intrusion in the overall system && no adware/crap.. suggestions?
Slashdot Mirror
not the software, and for the services they are entitled to demand whatever concessions they think the market will bear
Remember, be carefull now, that at one time, this is what was said about Software Licenses.
at one time people thought, "who cares what the software license is, its their copyright, they can make any changes that the 'market will bear'" -- this lead to the GNU Revolution you are presently seeing. Most people would have prefered it was unnecessary, to wrestle back control of Computer Software from profiteers in order that an open dialogue amoungst programmers, technologists, researchers and users could take place... all comprimised by myopic Free Market Zealots.
Let profit makers comprimise your rights today, and others will do it tomorrow. RedHat, IBM, AT&T whomever -- they will stretch the bounds *together* until all Licenses are so onerous that you'll think you were living in a Corporate State. Sound ridiculous? Witness what the RIAA/MPAA/BSA/??? does in order to control their IP via "Optional Licenses" -- basically your option is "live in a dark cave" or "accept your A$$ pucking slave". Just remember what RMS did as a response to a closed source printer driver will not always work... the computer world is managing to wrestle control from powerfull corporations this time, but *in the future* this will not always work. Not every 'industry' or 'situation' is equal. Music might do it (destroy the RIAA), but will TV? Movies? Books?
Bottom line: Shame on RedHat -- no For-Profit entity has any right whatsoever to demand sight audits or any other. If you want to have a adversarial(sp?) relationship with the world, keep right at it...
They do everything from linux
.NET.
They dumped Corel Linux in an effort to re-align themselves to their (then) new investment from MS, and MS promised them a role in
MS dumps Corel -- now where are they? Being bought out by some VCs? If COREL had stuck with Corel Linux, they could have used WordPerfect and Corel Office to drive the enterprise GNU/Linux adoption... they would be what Lindows so desperatly wants -- and still be able to compete w/ RedHat et al.
Leaving GNU/Linux was Corel's worst mistake in the last 5 years.
"Crappy public outreach programs" what are those? like aids awareness, condom distribution, and anti-domestic abuse programs?
it just isn't professional.
You know what, im sick of this 'unprofessional' trash. "Professional" is inhuman. Usually, any act of honesty is described as 'unprofessional' Im tired of my personal relations being filtered through the Blanket-of-Commerce that requires people to be a cog or a tool.
I could care less that a person was 'unprofessional' -- because a person's character is not defined by how well he conforms to his employers view of how best to achieve profit.
Justin has grown tired of being a wage-slave -- so have I.. I just dont have the resources to buy life back from my Corporate Masters just yet...
Freedom fighters eh? Methinks that some folks 'round here take this stuff a tad seriously
When the whole of ComputerDom has no viable alternative to MS's DRM-enabled, closed sourced OS & Apps, you will be thankfull people have been writing GNU/Linux.
The alternative is to stifle and choke the future of computing -- and the opportunity for dialogue, entertainment, democracy and commerce it provides.
Did you *read* the article? The gas primarily enourages fuel-efficiency, not density. And, sorry, property taxes MOST certainly do not encourage density. Suburbs enjoy a nice unburdened fresh-slate to escape taxes by building houses in former meadows/farmland/woods/etc.
Suburbs dont pay for the services suburbanites use. Suburbanites live as nats-on-the-arse of cities by using services (highways to work, parks, arenas, museams, galleries, symphonies, etc) they dont pay for.
Non-car owners dont pay for roads. Only users pay (this includes transport)
SPRAWL IS REDUCED(!) Sprawl causes car-centered communities that are inhuman in scale and design. Sprawl is VERY expensive. Increase in service areas (water/elec/snow removal/etc/etc), road construction, policing. This also provides a climate where denisty is encouraged -- leaving habitat more protected for plant and animals. Humans spreading out everywhere in suburbs causes much habitat loss. Paying for *the miles you drive* encourages you to DRIVE LESS.
While I dont agree that a 100% shift should occur, the tax should be collected 50% gas (encourage fuelefficiency) and 50% travel (enourage density).
ONTARIO: ARE YOU LISTENING?
reposted at the expense of my karma to thwart abuse of the moderator system.
The "curb urban sprawl" people are only trying to protect the value of their urban property.
yes, exactly!* Not just their individual property-values, but the currentinvestment in the communities in general. The roads already constucted, libraries, police stations, firestations, schools etc. When you spread the cities out all over, you increase the distance to these places -- making them less available/effective to everyone. Suburbs 'cling' of the services supplied by cities. Those cities provide jobs (and maintain the services to these commercial enterprises) while suburbs reap the taxes from their 'cheaply-serviced' residences. Suburbs have little public-service, libraries, museums, artgalleries, sports facilities etc. Suburbs/Cities are really, functionally, ONE community -- why the tax/spending/cost seperation? The poor balance means that city residents "subsidize" suburbanites by paying taxes to support these services.
Increase in policing due to suburbs? You must be joking.
You might be surprised to hear this, but "urban-crime" is caused by poverty -- not geography. When people 'abandon' the city to move to the suburbs, they leave failed communities in their wake. Where this under-class is left to without much opportunity. When people flee to the 'burbs, they *cause* dicay -- they are not fleeing from it, but really causing it.
By encouraging re-use of urban space you protect against this devistation, more balanced and healthy communities for everyone.
BTW, when i said "increase in police spending" i meant it in a 'all things being equal situation' -- that by increasing the SPACE to be policed (both of crime prevention and road-safety/law enforcment) you increase the cost.
One final note, the people who DISMISS the anti-sprawl advocates are trying to protect their development-profit-dollars.
Except you ignored my point and didnt read (comprehend) the article.
#1) Sprawl is bad. Sprawl is discouraged with this scheme.
#2) Your gas tax (in oregon at least) only pays 70% of the cost of roads. The other 30% comes from Non-gas taxes. People who *dont* drive at all are paying that 30% -- bad again.
#3) The article states that revenue decreases with fuel efficiency, people are loath to increase the gas tax, revenue for roads must be maintained, so the shortfall must be made-up. One way to do this is per-mile charges. What im saying is that this gives you the added beneift of actually REDUCING road-related expense by discouraging needless road-building *and* protect natural/unused spaces (a 'free' bonus to protect the environment).
This is one of the best ideas ive heard in a long while.. fair, practical and loads of benefits.
Non-car owners dont pay for roads. Only users pay (this includes transport)
SPRAWL IS REDUCED(!) Sprawl causes car-centered communities that are inhuman in scale and design. Sprawl is VERY expensive. Increase in service areas (water/elec/snow removal/etc/etc), road construction, policing. This also provides a climate where denisty is encouraged -- leaving habitat more protected for plant and animals. Humans spreading out everywhere in suburbs causes much habitat loss. Paying for *the miles you drive* encourages you to DRIVE LESS.
While I dont agree that a 100% shift should occur, the tax should be collected 50% gas (encourage fuelefficiency) and 50% travel (enourage density).
ONTARIO: ARE YOU LISTENING?
Terrific! Now Acer/HP will be dumping them like the fabled "Internet Appliances" (iopener/audrey/ia1/etc) on the net.
Ive got a ia1 w/ Lignux in my living room, very underpowered and a badish screen just dying to get repalced w/ an 802.11/touchscreen tablet...
Bring on the DISCONTINUED-DISCOUNTED tigerdirect deals!
when they put a translucent case around it and put a little apple logo on it, expect the AppleTablet to cost $4600. Lignux on a $2600 Acer sounds much better - Lignux on a $1500 laptop -- better yet.
If you used something like the dalas-semi one-wire i button stuff, (see here) i bet you could do just that...
GW Bush: Facing the threat of Islamic extremism head on
When the BushLeague gets the whole if Islam united and fully pissed at the good ol'USA, your going to have antoher dualism ala cold-war on your hands - but instead of being interested in a stale-mate, the muslims ill be 2billion interested in blowing themselves up on main street usa.
The War Against Reason^H^H^H^H^H^HTerror is going to turn USofA into Isreal.
Want to address religious fundies? start at home w/ BushCo's right-wing christian reformists who rule your domestic social agenda - religious fundies of all stripes (both muslims abroad and baptists in the USA) will be the death of us all.
Want to address islamic fascism? teach the world to read -- a f' of alot cheaper than the $400billion the USA is going to gift to the Military-Industrial Complex next year.
The War on Terror is guaranteed to be as big a sucess as the War on Drugs -- only the stakes are bigger!
the guiness-in-a-can that ive tried at a local coffe/bar (we meet there after critical-mass.org rides once a month.. not my venue of choice (as it requires drinking beers-in-a-can at all) but i digress..)... anyway, this guiness (in ontario, canada) has a simple round-floating-ball inside.
ive had two cans, and the head was terrific for a canned beer -- i did expect there had been some pressurized vessel of sorts inside, but a friend with me there assured me it was not the case... he *had* opened a can up to have a look at the goings-on within, and assured me that it was just a small floating sphere -- he was also expecting some clever co2 release scheme...
So, inside *these* cans is just a floating ball (ive been told) and no co2 release scheme at all... bottome line: is there TWO different draught-guiness-in-a-can things going on here? one with a floating ball and another like *youve* been given? have *you* opened up a can and had a look inside?
simply and stunning quote by mr.mallory; classic man vs. nature. says everything about being human in three words... thanks :)
What exactly is stopping, say... the janitor of Time-Warner getting drunk and selling me the entire company for $1?
1) That the janitor has no *reasonable* belief that he is acting within his mandate and 2) the purchaser, has no reasonable belief that this janitor has this authority.
Not to feed the conspiracy theorists too much, but AOL just did have a big settlement with MS, who would benifit greatly from any damage done to GPL.
but the GPL is a contract -- GNU can just re-write it to escape *that* particular ruling.
Except that the person, was an agent of Nullsoft - agents of commercial entities *are* legally capable of entering into an license agreement. This protects the 2nd party (in this case the public) from Businesses backing out of a 'deal' saying "this person didnt have the right to obligate us" - in fact, (s)he does.
imagine if some 3rd party came down on a seperate department (and previously unaware of this project) AOL for WASTE, maybe AOL's employees HAD discussed the matter with the people in their immediate sphere of relevance... all was well. teh decision to publish (and enter into the GPL license with the public) -- they cannot simply say "oh, we were just kidding". becasuse we, the public, had every reason to believe that the Nullsoft fellows had the authority (as they must have, in order to publish).
remember, IMNALBPOO/.
Most cities have flattened out into suburban sprawl.
Which itself is 95% of the "transportation problem" -- people spreading out across the landscape needlessly.
if there was greater density in NorthAmerican ciites, we could EASILY cut down our pollution drastically if mixed-use development, and high-density residences were encouraged. Sprawl wastes tax money (increased services, useless road cleaning/building, etc) NOT just pollution and environmental disaster...
get the book "Body of Secrets" (2001) by James Bamford
find this text here ive put the juicy bits in bold
Source: http://128.164.127.251/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc 1.pdf
James Bamford writes in Body of Secrets (2001) that this "may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government."
TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF WASHINGTON 25, D.C. 13 March 1962 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Subject: Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba (TS)
1. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attached Memorandum for the Chief of Operations., Cuba Project, which responds to a request of that office for brief but precise description of pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba.
2. The Joint Chiefs of Staff recommend that the proposed memorandum be forwarded as a preliminary submission suitable for planning purposes. It is assumed that there will be similar submissions from other agencies and that these inputs will be used as a basis for developing a time-phased plan. Individual projects can then be considered on a case-by-case basis.
3. Further, it is assumed that a single agency will be given the primary responsibility for developing military and para-military aspects of the basic plan. It is recommended that this responsibility for both overt and covert military operations be assigned the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
For the Joint Chiefs of Staff: [Signature] L.L. LEMNITZER Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
1 Enclosure memo for Chief of Operations., Cuba Project
SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEWED BY JCS ON 21 May 84 CLASSIFICATION CONTINUED
EXCLUDED FROM GDS EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING: DOD DIR 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY
TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED COPY NO. 1 SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION
TOP SECRET JCS 1969/321 12 March-1962 Page 2165 NOTE BY THE SECRETARIES to the JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
on NORTHWOODS (S) A report* on the above Subject is submitted for consideration by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
F. J. BLOUIN M. J. INGELIDO Joint Secretariat * Not reproduced herewith; on file in Joint Secretariat
EXCLUDED FROM GDS EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING: DOD DIR 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY
TOP SECRET JCS 1969/321 2165 UNCLASSIFIED TOP SECRET TOP SECRET UNCLASSIFIED
COPY NO. 1 SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION
TOP SECRET JCS 1969/321 14 March-1962 Page 2165
JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF DECISION ON JCS 1969/321
A Note by the Secretaries on NORTHWOODS (S) Note by the Secretaries
1. At their meeting on 13 March 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved the recommendations in paragraph 8 of JCS 1969/321.
2. In that the Commandant had expressed direct concern of the Marine Corps in this matter, the provisions of Title 10, US Code 141 (6), applied and were followed.
3. This decision now becomes a part of and shall be attached as the top sheet of JCS 1969/321.
F. J. BLOUIN M. J. INGELIDO
Joint Secretariat
SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEWED BY JCS ON 21 May 84 CLASSIFICATION CONTINUED
EXCLUDED FROM GDS EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING: DOD DIR 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY
UNCLASSIFIED [12 pages; classification stamps same on all pages, omitted after first page.]
TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED COPY _____ OF _____ COPIES SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION 9 March 1962
REPORT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF REPRESENTATIVE ON THE CARIBBEAN SURVEY GROUP to the JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF on CUBA PROJECT (TS)
The Chief of Operations, Cuba ProJect, has requested that he be furnished the views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on this matter by 13 March 1962.
EXCLUDED FROM GDS UNCLASSIFIED TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN
JUSTIFICATION FOR US MILITARY INTERVENTION IN CUBA (TS)
THE PROBLEM
1. As requested* by Chief of Operations, Cuba Project, the Joint Chiefs of Staff are to indicate brief but precise description of
Don't tread on me ... it's not just a cute saying on a flag - it requires backbone.
So, your saying that being a bully is a good thing? cant comprimise so you resort to violence? is *this* how things should be run?
I don't agree. Everything needs to be marketed. Giving something a name with negative connotations slows acceptance, or may even stop it. They want users don't they?
I dont agree, giving "marketing" too much weight is folly -- *I* dont consider it, actually, I am repulsed by Advertising and Marketing as intentional manipulation -- if you must resort to attempting to manipulate(lie) about something you are not honest enough for me to have a relationship (..like use your product for example.)
Things (ideas/products/works/art/whatever) either stand on their merit or they do not, no amount of marketing changes that. Unless, of course, you are irrational and easily influenced...
ive noticed that winamp3 on xp doesnt have the same WOW that it did over other apps like it in the 1 & 2 series days... ive become disenchanted with it (a bit unstable/unweildly(sp?) -- what mp3/ogg/media player do you use on Windows? something without to much intrusion in the overall system && no adware/crap.. suggestions?