This MAY sound weird. Corporations are not people. They are entities treated seperately from people. They are , legally, treated as living creatures, but they are not legally people. That sounds weird.. but look at it this way. Does Microsoft get a vote in the election coming up? Does Dell? Cisco? No. They are not the group that the constitution is addressed to or covering. Sure, LAWS are what Etrade broke, and LAWS are what they are bound to.. but they are not bound to the Bill of Rights. Especially not the 5th and 6th amendment. (Self incrimination and trial rights refer to GOVERNMENT RUN TRIALS, not third party arbitration.)
I am an editor of a newspaper. I decide I don't like you. I choose not to publish anything you say in my paper. I choose to not allow you to advertise in my paper. The reason I choose not to do this is because YOU like Ford and I like Chevrolet. Am I in the wrong?
NO. First off, I cannot be attacked by the government because of the freedom of the press. SECOND, you have no free speech in my paper. You have no free speech at all. You just simply have the promise that the government won't ever take it away. That doesn't mean you have it everywhere, it simply means you don't have to worry about the government restricting it.
Since when is a business held to the fifth and sixth amendments of the US Constitution? I don't see ETRADE as signators to the bill of rights. Please leave the constitution out of matters that do not concern it. This is one of those matters. How many times must people here be told, the constitution DOES NOT COVER PRIVATE ENTITIES. It is a documentation/contract between the GOVERNMENT and the PEOPLE. No businesses outside the government are bound to it directly in any way, shape , or form. Indirectly, yes, they are bound to the laws congress passes. Directly, no, businesses are not held to the laws contained in the constitution. Those laws are for government use only.
M
Why not use them all? That's SO enlightening. I'll use Mozilla on some pages, and the pages it screws up on, I'll use Konqi on. The pages that Konqi uses 40M to load, I'll use Galeon on. The pages that Galeon crashes on, I'll use the GTK one on. Why pay for this? It's overpriced? I'm sorry, I can't hear you. I'm too busy browsing six different web pages, using about 3 megs of RAM, almost no processor time, and THIS under the static bin. This browser should be a call out to ALL THE OTHER browsers for linux. It's time to make it sleek, stable, and sound. I don't care if you people think it's over priced. THIS IS GOOD SOFTWARE, as opposed to the crap that other companies put out, and I will pay for good software. Magnwa
What choice? Mozilla, the hog? Konqi , the unDebian? (at least Potato) Netscape, the outdated? How about Galeon, the stripped down hog? (Okay, that one sounds good, it's site is too slow for me, though). WHAT browser offering is there?! I mean, I hear all this talk about all these great browsers. I don't SEE them, though. "Oh, just wait, Jarrod, more will be on the way!" WHEN!? And why don't people realize that IE , their "competition", stopped sucking YEARS ago and started kicking the web's ass! Magnwa
Do either of you develop GNOME or KDE? No? Grow the fuck up and drop it. In case you haven't noticed, the war's over, they all agree it is. Time to move on, kids.
They've not been making a profit almost all along, their stock is taking a bath from where it was earlier, and they need to change what they are doing. The fact is, they are doing what they, as a business, see fit, and they do not give a damn about what we think as long as we keep buying it.
Yes. Everything they do must be about making money. It is federal law as well as an SEC requirement to their shareholders that almost all business maneuvers be made in the benefit of the shareholders. That means, actually sustaining a profit. If it means dropping sparc, it means dropping sparc. If it means, one day, dropping i386, it means dropping i386. If you don't like it, I suggest you boycott them, and use Debian or Freebsd or something else that has no major commercial ties to the SEC or a stock exchange. That's the price of going public.
M
Re:It's alot more effective than you would think
on
Million E-mail March
·
· Score: 2
It would be effective, but the congress has stop-gap measures in place to assure that they NEVER get too much email. Remember that Whitehouse "spam blocker" that got put up around the impeachment times? Or the congressmen who refused to get email and so blocked issues out? The fact is, they can shut down the email for a couple of days and our "million email march" is pointless, and that is exactly what they will do, too. Add to that the fact that some yahoo is going to write a script, and boom.. all of our email's are worthless, counted as "possible statistical error". Nah.. lick and stick a stamp, and BUY MUSIC FROM MP3.COM. They have an INCREDIBLE selection:)
This is all under the assumption that AMD and Intel haven't got any secret dark projects that they are hiding from the media. Just because Transmeta has been whored around by the techworld (primarily slashdot) doesn't mean that the bigger companies (the man) are doing nothing new and unique. This is to be expected from slashdot, though, because if you follow the money, you'll probably find out a lot of the higher ups in VA are going to invest in Transmeta.
Oh, freedom and software? I'm sorry, it's not about that anymore:) It's about money. If you still think it's about freedom, leave the 90's, and join us in 2000. (or support Debian)
Now, the cost, of course to this is that with Debian, unless you run bleeding edge Debian with it's bugs and inproprieties is that you get about four to six month old software. That sucks. Sorry, Debian, but you need package pools BADLY.
Well, I've seen bills that had the "unlimited" plan and that plan doesn't count various forms of POP3 email and other non Palm clipping stuff. I used to sell these damn things and heard lots of horror stories about how much they are a ripoff. If you stick to the palm.net service, you're fine.. but if you do excessive mailings and stuff through it, prepare to get billed out the ears.
*BZZZT* According to the handspring modules stuff, Avantgo is going to offer special support on some kind of wireless springboards. So.. it may not be hardware , but I promise you it will be wireless.
Perhaps, but the wireless access is FAR too pricy for my book. $49.95 plus hidden charges here there and everywhere.. I know people who get a lot of email who ended up paying $300 a month. At least Bluetooth looks to be a static fee, and that'll come out on the visor.
You are right on the third count, but let me point something out to you. If you wrote something, and someone stole it from you, would you like being labeled "Anti-Open Source" because you refuse to let them complete the theft of the product? The RIAA has no problem with digital dissemination. They let Spinner operate. They've signed multiple contracts with Windows Media and REAL and Broadcast.Com. The problem that mp3.com and Napster have is that they STOLE FIRST and ASKED SECOND. This creates a doubt in the industry. They aren't being anti-digital, they just aren't choosing methods of being digital that are approved by the "grassroots ubergeek hatefest". Maybe if someone approached them logically and legally, they would consider it?
Yes, also, let me add that Napster IS a good idea. Their arrogant "We didn't steal anything" mentality though is not something that is needed. When the RIAA holds all the cards, bluffing may not be the best method. We all have SEEN Napster people online, in the rooms of that place. There's no way they didn't know piracy was going on, and that'll be proven in court in about ten minutes. The rest of the trial will be legal crap about what is and is not first amendment, and whether the copyright should be yanked due to unfair labor practices. (It'll never happen. Then ALL music becomes illegal until relicensed by the original author)
THis is a mess, but please remember that there are right and wrong ways of doing things, and Napster chose the wrong way. Music wants to be free until you watch your friend get ripped off wholesale.
I am really curious why people think this. Let me point it out and get your responses:
1. People steal music through Napster. Yes, I know Napster is "just a service." The truth is that it facilitates the theft of copyrighted stuff. I live in Nashville. For every Britney Spears, there are thousands of artists creeping by that get $0.00 from their song being ripped onto Napster. Theft is a form of flattery, but it doesn't put fod on the table.
2. The RIAA , which is the Recording Industry Artists of America, a UNION FOR AND BY THE ARTISTS, chooses to fight the digital theft of music. THey go after Napster.
3. The community gets this notion in their head that the RIAA is backwards because they are protecting their work. They get this odd feeling that the RIAA is "anti digital."
Now let me ask you my question. Why do people do it this way, and THEN turn around and say to the RIAA "You need to just get into the digital market, you're upset that we're providing another distribution means, if you just joined us you'd make money." Umm.. excuse me, business proposals from the people who invented a method to support wholesale theft?
Who said the RIAA isn't interested in digital music? I for one know they are. It's just they aren't interested in helping make the people who facilitated wholesale theft of their music rich. They want business partners in this that they can trust, not partners that take the music and then ask them why they aren't involved.
I have free software. Free ISPs. Everyone who works at a computer store knows the universal truth is that you talk to the vendor reps and they will give you all the free stuff you could ever want. Why? They want you to talk it up. They want you to sell their product. Free DSL, hardware, software, whatever! Just talk their product! It's not that hard to understand, and it's certainly not unethical or illegal to solicit advertising in this manner.
I mean.. look at it this way.. how many weeks has it been going on? A new show every week, right? Yet , Gretchen was voted off the island on day 21. The contest only runs thirty nine days, folks. It's already over. The winner already has been chosen. It's just the matter of airing the episodes.
I'm well aware of that. I live in Nashville and have made many friends in and out of the music industry here. (Shouts out to John Kay of Steppenwolf.. you still rock:) ) While I am saying that the RIAA pays them $.03 a song, I am not saying that's fair. The truth is, though, that's three cents a song MORE than Napster makes them per song. Saying that the RIAA or label doesn't help the artist does NOT justify the use of Napster. Now.. what would be interesting, is a new economic model in the music industry that uses MP3's and a per-song payment of greater than $.03 . Maybe $.50 - $1.00 to more. That way, people actually can make money off their work.:)
The "buy the CD" to support the aritst claim is not mine. I am simply saying that by buying the CD someone is supporting the artist more than Napster does. Mind you, only $.30 more:) But still..
$.03 per song per CD sold currently under the collective bargaining agreement of the RIAA. Not much, but still.. How can you people say you're supporting the artist? I don't see you all rushing to send money in for the one or two songs that don't suck on the CD. You claim you'd pay $2 - $5 for a good song, so put your money where your mouth is. Shut up, and pay up. Because if you DON'T buy the CD, and just download it from Napster, talking about supporting the artist is crap. The RIAA supports the artists more than the common napster thief, even if it is around $.50 a CD sold. I'm sorry, but if you want to support your artist and ruin the RIAA, give the artists proof that this method will pay them better than the RIAA. Then you will see Napster flourish, and quite possibly LEGALLY too. magnwa
This is the hardest thing I've ever had to go through. See, I take things like this personally. My mom's a school teacher, and I am just waiting to recieve a phone call from some police officer.. and then having to drive 8 hours to her funeral because some kid shot her.
If you ever wanted things to matter most.. listen to what I have to say. 15 people died in a school a year ago. Fifteen people stared at death. They went to school, and they didn't come home. Fifteen people , fifteen dreams, fifteen sparks of life were snuffed out in one hellish 30 minute experience. What gives ANY of us the right to bitch about who gets credit? I'd give everything I owned away JUST to know I stopped the next one from happening. I want you to step up and admit it. You're being selfish, and I'm really ashamed to know it. You have a set of standards for a DAMN OPERATING SYSTEM.. and you have a lower set of standards for human life. What the hell is that?
We have to remember. We cannot forget what happened. Ever. We owe people of the world that cannot get to slashdot our feelings, our emotions, our beliefs. If even just ONE comment can stop this from happening again, then the entire project is worthy. And yet, many of you want to complain. Many of you want credit. How many of you even give a damn about human life, and not some damnable OPERATING SYSTEM for a stupid COMPUTER!?
I propose the money be donated to HOPE. This stands for Healing of people everywhere. It was founded by a Columbine volleyball coach, whose own daughter died in the attack. This daughter was a valedictorian and star player on the team. They retired her number. She was number eight. Don't forget her number. These were school kids.. in the library, during school. HOPE wants to remove the floor, and turn the library into an atrium above the cafeteria, where students can look up and see the rocky mountains through the windows. They need 3.1 million to do this.
Please. Stop fighting over who owns the comments. Remember what prompted the comments. An article based on the fact that 15 people died, and how it didn't need to happen. What has happened in a year to us? Most of us cared back then. We posted deeply heart wrenching posts, that allowed a little into our hearts and what we felt towards this. A year later, we all want credit for having some thoughtful thing to say. We worry about 'who'll get the money' and 'where's my piece of the pie'? Play those games with your damn OS. Don't play those games with this event. I don't want to point on my resume and say I got credit for something I wrote after fifteen people died. I would much rather the world see what we all had to say, and the people of the world maybe can try to stop this from happening again. I'll trade all the credit in the world for that.
Okay. I don't get it. You post a story about closed source products, and five billion people get all pissy about how everything should be GPL and how everyone should have access to it and not pay anything, because by damn, share the code!
Now.. your comments are being used in a book, the proceeds are going to charity, and the purpose of the book is to share the information with people who cannot get here or do not come here. (I mean, if they can get here, we all have read the Hellmouth series.. why would we need a book?) Now all of you start whining about "credit" and "unfairness". Tell me how this is different from Redhat selling GPL'd code and making money off it? Oh, yeah, I know, they sell support. *chuckles* Whatever. Most people walking into CompUSA don't even know they can download Redhat for free.. at least not those that walk into CompUSA's looking for Linux. So anyway, you code something and Redhat sells it. Now is it because you get credit on the final product? Heck, that's even MORE justification to get compensated for it. But no one seems to have a problem with redhat.. or even worse, Corel or Storm. Those are two companies that took the very distribution that has a "free or not" inclusion method and turned it around to make money on it. Money that doesn't even go to Debian. Don't you find that insulting? No. You support companies like that. YOu laud them. You say things like, "WHy don't more companies do that?"
And yet, when we have a chance to share the information with more people.. with NO ONE involved in the publication making money.. with charity being helped.. you start bitching. What the heck is this, people? What sick double standard exists here? You have NO problem helping companies like Redhat or Storm or COrel by having your code GPL'd and included.. but the chance your comments here have to do SOME good you resist it? I mean GOOD, folks. Stuff that MATTERS. What if your comment saves fifteen people's lives? What if someone really needs to see your comment to understand it?
OH, but I don't want my comment to reach people that don't come to slashdot. And yet you have no problem with the GPL? Grow up, folks. Make a damn difference for once in your life.
Oh.. that's right.. most you all don't code. You just are here to help flame.
Jarrod Henry This comment is FREE to the public, free to the world.
Dear, everyone's in it for the money. Anyone who isn't in it for the money is still in college and living off their parents' money. Once they get out of college, they either have to be in it for the money, or they have to get out of Linux. Life is only big enough for one occupying profession:) Welcome to reality. Linus' plan of world domination is going to require linux to look a bit like Microsoft in many things. After all, they wrote the book on world domination:)
Slashdot Mirror
This MAY sound weird. Corporations are not people. They are entities treated seperately from people. They are , legally, treated as living creatures, but they are not legally people. That sounds weird.. but look at it this way. Does Microsoft get a vote in the election coming up? Does Dell? Cisco? No. They are not the group that the constitution is addressed to or covering. Sure, LAWS are what Etrade broke, and LAWS are what they are bound to.. but they are not bound to the Bill of Rights. Especially not the 5th and 6th amendment. (Self incrimination and trial rights refer to GOVERNMENT RUN TRIALS, not third party arbitration.)
Magnwa
Hypothetical:
I am an editor of a newspaper. I decide I don't like you. I choose not to publish anything you say in my paper. I choose to not allow you to advertise in my paper. The reason I choose not to do this is because YOU like Ford and I like Chevrolet. Am I in the wrong?
NO. First off, I cannot be attacked by the government because of the freedom of the press. SECOND, you have no free speech in my paper. You have no free speech at all. You just simply have the promise that the government won't ever take it away. That doesn't mean you have it everywhere, it simply means you don't have to worry about the government restricting it.
It sounds like semantics.. but it's not.
Magnwa
Since when is a business held to the fifth and sixth amendments of the US Constitution? I don't see ETRADE as signators to the bill of rights. Please leave the constitution out of matters that do not concern it. This is one of those matters. How many times must people here be told, the constitution DOES NOT COVER PRIVATE ENTITIES. It is a documentation/contract between the GOVERNMENT and the PEOPLE. No businesses outside the government are bound to it directly in any way, shape , or form. Indirectly, yes, they are bound to the laws congress passes. Directly, no, businesses are not held to the laws contained in the constitution. Those laws are for government use only. M
Why not use them all? That's SO enlightening. I'll use Mozilla on some pages, and the pages it screws up on, I'll use Konqi on. The pages that Konqi uses 40M to load, I'll use Galeon on. The pages that Galeon crashes on, I'll use the GTK one on. Why pay for this? It's overpriced? I'm sorry, I can't hear you. I'm too busy browsing six different web pages, using about 3 megs of RAM, almost no processor time, and THIS under the static bin. This browser should be a call out to ALL THE OTHER browsers for linux. It's time to make it sleek, stable, and sound. I don't care if you people think it's over priced. THIS IS GOOD SOFTWARE, as opposed to the crap that other companies put out, and I will pay for good software. Magnwa
What choice? Mozilla, the hog? Konqi , the unDebian? (at least Potato) Netscape, the outdated? How about Galeon, the stripped down hog? (Okay, that one sounds good, it's site is too slow for me, though). WHAT browser offering is there?! I mean, I hear all this talk about all these great browsers. I don't SEE them, though. "Oh, just wait, Jarrod, more will be on the way!" WHEN!? And why don't people realize that IE , their "competition", stopped sucking YEARS ago and started kicking the web's ass! Magnwa
Do either of you develop GNOME or KDE? No? Grow the fuck up and drop it. In case you haven't noticed, the war's over, they all agree it is. Time to move on, kids.
M
They've not been making a profit almost all along, their stock is taking a bath from where it was earlier, and they need to change what they are doing. The fact is, they are doing what they, as a business, see fit, and they do not give a damn about what we think as long as we keep buying it.
M
Yes. Everything they do must be about making money. It is federal law as well as an SEC requirement to their shareholders that almost all business maneuvers be made in the benefit of the shareholders. That means, actually sustaining a profit. If it means dropping sparc, it means dropping sparc. If it means, one day, dropping i386, it means dropping i386. If you don't like it, I suggest you boycott them, and use Debian or Freebsd or something else that has no major commercial ties to the SEC or a stock exchange. That's the price of going public.
M
It would be effective, but the congress has stop-gap measures in place to assure that they NEVER get too much email. Remember that Whitehouse "spam blocker" that got put up around the impeachment times? Or the congressmen who refused to get email and so blocked issues out? The fact is, they can shut down the email for a couple of days and our "million email march" is pointless, and that is exactly what they will do, too. Add to that the fact that some yahoo is going to write a script, and boom.. all of our email's are worthless, counted as "possible statistical error". Nah.. lick and stick a stamp, and BUY MUSIC FROM MP3.COM. They have an INCREDIBLE selection :)
M
This is all under the assumption that AMD and Intel haven't got any secret dark projects that they are hiding from the media. Just because Transmeta has been whored around by the techworld (primarily slashdot) doesn't mean that the bigger companies (the man) are doing nothing new and unique. This is to be expected from slashdot, though, because if you follow the money, you'll probably find out a lot of the higher ups in VA are going to invest in Transmeta.
:) It's about money. If you still think it's about freedom, leave the 90's, and join us in 2000. (or support Debian)
Oh, freedom and software? I'm sorry, it's not about that anymore
Now, the cost, of course to this is that with Debian, unless you run bleeding edge Debian with it's bugs and inproprieties is that you get about four to six month old software. That sucks. Sorry, Debian, but you need package pools BADLY.
M
Well, I've seen bills that had the "unlimited" plan and that plan doesn't count various forms of POP3 email and other non Palm clipping stuff. I used to sell these damn things and heard lots of horror stories about how much they are a ripoff. If you stick to the palm.net service, you're fine.. but if you do excessive mailings and stuff through it, prepare to get billed out the ears.
M
*BZZZT* According to the handspring modules stuff, Avantgo is going to offer special support on some kind of wireless springboards. So.. it may not be hardware , but I promise you it will be wireless.
Magnwa
Perhaps, but the wireless access is FAR too pricy for my book. $49.95 plus hidden charges here there and everywhere.. I know people who get a lot of email who ended up paying $300 a month. At least Bluetooth looks to be a static fee, and that'll come out on the visor.
magnwa
You are right on the third count, but let me point something out to you. If you wrote something, and someone stole it from you, would you like being labeled "Anti-Open Source" because you refuse to let them complete the theft of the product? The RIAA has no problem with digital dissemination. They let Spinner operate. They've signed multiple contracts with Windows Media and REAL and Broadcast.Com. The problem that mp3.com and Napster have is that they STOLE FIRST and ASKED SECOND. This creates a doubt in the industry. They aren't being anti-digital, they just aren't choosing methods of being digital that are approved by the "grassroots ubergeek hatefest". Maybe if someone approached them logically and legally, they would consider it?
Magnwa
Yes, also, let me add that Napster IS a good idea. Their arrogant "We didn't steal anything" mentality though is not something that is needed. When the RIAA holds all the cards, bluffing may not be the best method. We all have SEEN Napster people online, in the rooms of that place. There's no way they didn't know piracy was going on, and that'll be proven in court in about ten minutes. The rest of the trial will be legal crap about what is and is not first amendment, and whether the copyright should be yanked due to unfair labor practices. (It'll never happen. Then ALL music becomes illegal until relicensed by the original author)
THis is a mess, but please remember that there are right and wrong ways of doing things, and Napster chose the wrong way. Music wants to be free until you watch your friend get ripped off wholesale.
Magnwa
I am really curious why people think this. Let me point it out and get your responses:
1. People steal music through Napster. Yes, I know Napster is "just a service." The truth is that it facilitates the theft of copyrighted stuff. I live in Nashville. For every Britney Spears, there are thousands of artists creeping by that get $0.00 from their song being ripped onto Napster. Theft is a form of flattery, but it doesn't put fod on the table.
2. The RIAA , which is the Recording Industry Artists of America, a UNION FOR AND BY THE ARTISTS, chooses to fight the digital theft of music. THey go after Napster.
3. The community gets this notion in their head that the RIAA is backwards because they are protecting their work. They get this odd feeling that the RIAA is "anti digital."
Now let me ask you my question. Why do people do it this way, and THEN turn around and say to the RIAA "You need to just get into the digital market, you're upset that we're providing another distribution means, if you just joined us you'd make money." Umm.. excuse me, business proposals from the people who invented a method to support wholesale theft?
Who said the RIAA isn't interested in digital music? I for one know they are. It's just they aren't interested in helping make the people who facilitated wholesale theft of their music rich. They want business partners in this that they can trust, not partners that take the music and then ask them why they aren't involved.
Magnwa
So? You ask.. the point?
I have free software. Free ISPs. Everyone who works at a computer store knows the universal truth is that you talk to the vendor reps and they will give you all the free stuff you could ever want. Why? They want you to talk it up. They want you to sell their product. Free DSL, hardware, software, whatever! Just talk their product! It's not that hard to understand, and it's certainly not unethical or illegal to solicit advertising in this manner.
Magnwa
Nope. It wasn't. There's someone from our area who was on it. It was taped from March 15th or so to April 24th or so.
Magnwa
I mean.. look at it this way.. how many weeks has it been going on? A new show every week, right? Yet , Gretchen was voted off the island on day 21. The contest only runs thirty nine days, folks. It's already over. The winner already has been chosen. It's just the matter of airing the episodes.
Magnwa
I'm well aware of that. I live in Nashville and have made many friends in and out of the music industry here. (Shouts out to John Kay of Steppenwolf.. you still rock :) ) While I am saying that the RIAA pays them $.03 a song, I am not saying that's fair. The truth is, though, that's three cents a song MORE than Napster makes them per song. Saying that the RIAA or label doesn't help the artist does NOT justify the use of Napster. Now.. what would be interesting, is a new economic model in the music industry that uses MP3's and a per-song payment of greater than $.03 . Maybe $.50 - $1.00 to more. That way, people actually can make money off their work. :)
:) But still..
The "buy the CD" to support the aritst claim is not mine. I am simply saying that by buying the CD someone is supporting the artist more than Napster does. Mind you, only $.30 more
Magnwa
$.03 per song per CD sold currently under the collective bargaining agreement of the RIAA. Not much, but still.. How can you people say you're supporting the artist? I don't see you all rushing to send money in for the one or two songs that don't suck on the CD. You claim you'd pay $2 - $5 for a good song, so put your money where your mouth is. Shut up, and pay up. Because if you DON'T buy the CD, and just download it from Napster, talking about supporting the artist is crap. The RIAA supports the artists more than the common napster thief, even if it is around $.50 a CD sold. I'm sorry, but if you want to support your artist and ruin the RIAA, give the artists proof that this method will pay them better than the RIAA. Then you will see Napster flourish, and quite possibly LEGALLY too. magnwa
If you ever wanted things to matter most.. listen to what I have to say. 15 people died in a school a year ago. Fifteen people stared at death. They went to school, and they didn't come home. Fifteen people , fifteen dreams, fifteen sparks of life were snuffed out in one hellish 30 minute experience. What gives ANY of us the right to bitch about who gets credit? I'd give everything I owned away JUST to know I stopped the next one from happening. I want you to step up and admit it. You're being selfish, and I'm really ashamed to know it. You have a set of standards for a DAMN OPERATING SYSTEM.. and you have a lower set of standards for human life. What the hell is that?
We have to remember. We cannot forget what happened. Ever. We owe people of the world that cannot get to slashdot our feelings, our emotions, our beliefs. If even just ONE comment can stop this from happening again, then the entire project is worthy. And yet, many of you want to complain. Many of you want credit. How many of you even give a damn about human life, and not some damnable OPERATING SYSTEM for a stupid COMPUTER!?
I propose the money be donated to HOPE. This stands for Healing of people everywhere. It was founded by a Columbine volleyball coach, whose own daughter died in the attack. This daughter was a valedictorian and star player on the team. They retired her number. She was number eight. Don't forget her number. These were school kids.. in the library, during school. HOPE wants to remove the floor, and turn the library into an atrium above the cafeteria, where students can look up and see the rocky mountains through the windows. They need 3.1 million to do this.
Please. Stop fighting over who owns the comments. Remember what prompted the comments. An article based on the fact that 15 people died, and how it didn't need to happen. What has happened in a year to us? Most of us cared back then. We posted deeply heart wrenching posts, that allowed a little into our hearts and what we felt towards this. A year later, we all want credit for having some thoughtful thing to say. We worry about 'who'll get the money' and 'where's my piece of the pie'? Play those games with your damn OS. Don't play those games with this event. I don't want to point on my resume and say I got credit for something I wrote after fifteen people died. I would much rather the world see what we all had to say, and the people of the world maybe can try to stop this from happening again. I'll trade all the credit in the world for that.
Jarrod Henry
Now.. your comments are being used in a book, the proceeds are going to charity, and the purpose of the book is to share the information with people who cannot get here or do not come here. (I mean, if they can get here, we all have read the Hellmouth series.. why would we need a book?) Now all of you start whining about "credit" and "unfairness". Tell me how this is different from Redhat selling GPL'd code and making money off it? Oh, yeah, I know, they sell support. *chuckles* Whatever. Most people walking into CompUSA don't even know they can download Redhat for free.. at least not those that walk into CompUSA's looking for Linux. So anyway, you code something and Redhat sells it. Now is it because you get credit on the final product? Heck, that's even MORE justification to get compensated for it. But no one seems to have a problem with redhat.. or even worse, Corel or Storm. Those are two companies that took the very distribution that has a "free or not" inclusion method and turned it around to make money on it. Money that doesn't even go to Debian. Don't you find that insulting? No. You support companies like that. YOu laud them. You say things like, "WHy don't more companies do that?"
And yet, when we have a chance to share the information with more people.. with NO ONE involved in the publication making money.. with charity being helped.. you start bitching. What the heck is this, people? What sick double standard exists here? You have NO problem helping companies like Redhat or Storm or COrel by having your code GPL'd and included.. but the chance your comments here have to do SOME good you resist it? I mean GOOD, folks. Stuff that MATTERS. What if your comment saves fifteen people's lives? What if someone really needs to see your comment to understand it?
OH, but I don't want my comment to reach people that don't come to slashdot. And yet you have no problem with the GPL? Grow up, folks. Make a damn difference for once in your life.
Oh.. that's right.. most you all don't code. You just are here to help flame.
Jarrod Henry This comment is FREE to the public, free to the world.
Dear, everyone's in it for the money. Anyone who isn't in it for the money is still in college and living off their parents' money. Once they get out of college, they either have to be in it for the money, or they have to get out of Linux. Life is only big enough for one occupying profession :) Welcome to reality. Linus' plan of world domination is going to require linux to look a bit like Microsoft in many things. After all, they wrote the book on world domination :)