No way. The challenge to find a currently wrong article that has been for more than a week is in fact a lot harder if you don't change the wording. It's not a technicality, it's the spirit of the thing. The relaxed collection from which you picked the article is at least a hundred times larger than the collection in the challenge. That is what makes it so difficult to find an example. He didn't say there weren't any articles that were wrong for more than a week, but that there were so few of them that no one would find them. (hint: he said "more reliable", not "perfect")
We have Venezuela as a business partner and have a good relationship with them, although a lot less than with Brazil, Argentina, China and the US, which are larger partners.
You cite Antonini Wilson's suitcase as a proof that Chavez financed Argentina. In the same thread where you ask for the US to intervene in Latin American internal affairs. Chavez says that case was a set-up, with the US doing what you think they should be doing. Trying to get right of those damn commies.
In favor of the US version documented in Wikipedia there is the fact that Chavez _is_ capable of such kind of thing. In favor of the non-US version: going through customs with that suitcase was unnecessary. Also, Antonini Wilson is too good a friend with US intelligence and is free after trying to smuggle 800 thousand dollars. That might lead some people to think he might be a US agent. Plus, US intelligence is not only capable of doing such a thing, but a lot more, because we saw them, and their own files confirm it.
Of course, if Antonini Wilson was judged in Venezuela, or even in Argentina, I wouldn't give a lot of credit to the process either, because this is an intelligence issue, not a legal issue. The people involved will do anything to protect their interests, and courts are not above that.
(About wikipedia having the US version: I don't mean wikipedia is somehow biased as a whole. I mean _that_ wikipedia page you cite is of very low encyclopedic quality. It's built from a small collection of facts, and media coverage, a lot of hypotheses, and doesn't take account of all the media saying that Antonini Wilson might be a US agent.
An example of bad edition is that in the abstract, the article implies that Venezuelan agents arrested in the US pledged guilty of pressuring Antonini Wilson, when the cited fact is that they pledged guilty of acting as intelligence agents. )
Don't get me wrong, I don't like Chavez either, but I know some Latin American history and he doesn't rank at the top ten worse Latin American presidents.
About Honduras... well, they did it against those f'n commies, you're right. What I think is that democracy is too fragile to mess with it. Other countries should not support a coup.
I wonder when is the US going to do anything serious about the democracy deterioration in latin america. The list of countries where democracy is falling apart is growing year by year. First it was only Cuba, but then Venezuela's Chavez joined the club. Chavez is so determined in exporting his ideology that he has successfully used the country's wealth to build alliances and undermine democracy in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and in less measure Argentina, and now he is trying really hard in Honduras, Peru and Colombia.
The US have done a lot about what you call "democracy deterioration" in Latin America, mostly in the seventies.
I assume you really mean they should do something about those f'n commies.
They did something back in the seventies, do you remember? A bit from the wikipedia:
Operation Condor (Spanish: Operación Cóndor, Portuguese: Operação Condor), was a campaign of political repression involving assassination and intelligence operations officially implemented in 1975 by the governments of the Southern Cone of South America. The program aimed to eradicate alleged socialist and communist influence and ideas and to control active or potential opposition movements against the participating right-wing governments.[citation needed] Due to its clandestine nature, the precise number of deaths directly attributable to Operation Condor will likely never be known, but it is reported to have caused over sixty thousand [1], possibly even more.[2][3][4]
Condor's key members were the governments in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Brazil. The United States participated in a supervisory capacity, with Ecuador and Peru joining later in more peripheral roles.[5]
I don't think the US should do anything outside their borders. We are fine as we are right now.
Bolivia is a healthy democracy that recently confirmed its government. Ecuador is also. Saying that Chavez can influence Argentina is an insult to Argentina as a regional power. About Honduras... I don't know what you think about Honduras, but Chavez is very much in line about that issue with Brazil and the rest of Mercosur. And I hope you are not trying to say that Chavez is forcing his interests on Brazil.
But you're in a problem domain that would have required calculus even if it you were solving the problem with rulers and graph paper. If you were working with accounting software, you'd do much better if you knew the generally accepted accounting principles... but do CS courses teach that? No.
I don't know about calculus, but some logic would have taught you to stop answering your own questions.
I've seen examples where third parties require cookies to analyze the usage patterns of users on client sites but I don't require logs to understand usage trends on sites where I have easy access to log files. In fact, I think usability testing would reveal more than analysis of usage data.
No way. Usage data is a direct measure, while user tests are a very rough estimate. Tracking usage is key if you want to have a website that is good for its users.
So real situation: Someone opens up a wireless network with open access in one block of the town. Someone (very probably) did something illegal with it. The people who pay for the connection get a letter saying there is illegal usage being made of it and decide to shut it down.
You are right, too much spin. Anyhow, it's interesting to stop and think what we are talking about, like if we weren't used to this kind of thing.
Several people lost their free internet access because in their country it is illegal to _download_ a movie. That kind of law does not seem to be doing much in favor of the advancement of society. I understand that it's their country, and they can go wherever they want with their laws, but it seems a braindead srategy, from the outside.
Maybe I underestimate the importance of the entertainment industry, or overestimate the importance of a medium like the internet, but it seems ridiculous to me.
It seems canonical is more interested to show they can deliver something on time, rather than delivering something good when it's ready or delaying the release until proper QA is done.
That is kind of dumb. Ubuntu releases polished LTS versions every two years, with good QA, so you can deploy them in an enterprise environment, with paid support available, and a sensible upgrade path. In between, they release other versions for users for whom new software is more important than QA, and we like it. They do deliver what we expect, and on time too.
The App Store is not like a record store in a mall... in case you haven't noticed in real life you have choices.
The app store is like the state-run department store in some communist country, where everything is approved by the loving hand of the state lest you be exposed to anything counter-revolutionary. But don't worry, we have everything you need comrade! Ignore the capitalist scum, demanding freedom.
You talk about a typical capitalist monopoly and get confused by saying that it is somehow like a communist regime. The computer industry is capitalism at its best, with its pros and its cons. A totalitarian regime would either not let you access the store, or give you everything preloaded, and pushed by the central administration. The communist (not sovietic, Marx-style communist), version of the apple store would be more like a only GPLv3 wiki-store where you have to pay apps with code or testing.
I wonder if people from 2050 er 2060 where did the decade go? from 50 years in the future came back in time to now and dropped their latest microchip, if it would even be useful? Sure, they have picometer circuits, but so what? We still don't know how to make them.
Which Afghanis? The women being beaten and killed for attending school? The families fleeing across the border to escape the Taliban?
Or do you mean the warlords and friends? Because they're quite happy there...
Remember that women were not beaten and killed any more in Afghanistan for attending school _before_ US invasion. They are now, _after_ the invasion. And they get to wear burkas.
Invading a country is not cool. For instance, Iraqis were living a lot better under Saddam than now. It's been 8 years. 8 years could have been enough in this time to get rid of him, and let someone better in power, without killing so many Iraqis.
You seem to not be able to distinguish between free software and open source software. Copyleft is needed for free software.
No, you're not going to drag me into that semantic cesspool. Sorry. I've spent a couple of years studying the methodology of cults, and one of the things which they do, that I know about, is what is called "loading of the language."
It's a technique where either entirely new terms are invented, primarily for the purpose of creating seperation between the cult and the outside world, or, more insidiously, where existing words are given a new, internal, cultic definition.
The fact that you are thinking in terms of Stallman's terminology, and trying to foist it on me here, tells me that you are a cultist; and cultists are people I have very little time for, primarily for the reason that attempting to argue with mind control is an almost entirely futile exercise.
I kinda agree with you in principle. Of course semantics is the issue here. The thing is that I don't think I am the one inventing new words. I was actually responding to your usage of that "FOSS" term, because that's exactly what I think it is, a semantic game that changes the center of the discussion.
Stallman started using "free software" as in freedom, to talk about software that does not restrict your freedom. It's not a technical term, it's more philosophical, and in real life it it a legal thing, more than anything. I don't think it had a former meaning. "free software" as in "free beer" is and was not really relevant to take precedence over this. Esp. because most unpaid software that is not free software is not actually "no cost" in principle. Maybe I am biased because I speak Spanish, for us it's clear what "software libre" means, and it can only have one meaning.
Then, other people invented the "open source" term. It means another thing. Open source is a technical term, for people who focus at that kind of thing.
Then, other people came up the "FOSS" term. The thing is that I think _that_ term is loaded, because they say "FOSS" when people are talking about free software. Than means they can start using technical arguments, and so they divert te discussion. Free software is a legal thing.
When I insist on not using the relatively new "FOSS" term I am trying not to talk about the technical aspects, and try to focus on legal aspects. I really care about people knowing that there _are_ legal aspects of using software.
People know that they have to pay for licenses, even though it's not technically necessary. That is not a technical issue, that's a legal thing. Well, people who care about free software care about people thinking about other legal consequences of using software, and taking that into account.
You might be smart enough not to buy an iphone if it's now what your need, but someone who does not know or care about the issues of a proprietary platform, might not be able to know whether it's the best choice for them. And those are the people who set the standards.
Anyhow, my point about the iphone is that it's a case where free software is used to restrict what users can do with stuff they buy. With copyleft, that could not happen. That is the different. If someone wrote free software with an "open source" mindset, because of a technical motivation, that is OK. If they had intended to write free software, with purpose of providing a free software platform with the legal advantages it has, that would be a FAIL, because of the lack of copyleft.
Linux is a kernel, and it's not a consumer product. It's a software project, but it doesn't even have a price. Market concepts are not universal in principle, and also they don't apply that easily to free things.
You don't seem to understand the concept of usability. Windows is not usable if you analyze it by formal usability metrics, and it has a great market share. Usability is not all. For example, familiarity is even more important. Interoperability costs are important too.
Ubuntu would need to be a lot better to get people to switch. Right now it's only better.
Well, my girlfriend would differ. For actual casual users, there is no issue with using Ubuntu vs a working version of windows. Firefox starts from the same icon, photo software looks the same and works the same. Ipod synchronization just works. Simple games are included. In my experience, Windows machines require either a very experienced windows user, or someone that does routine maintenance. My current machine was installed with ubuntu 5.10 and survived lots of software and hardware upgrades and 2 diskdrive crashes (I backup with dd), without wasting time in maintenance.
The FSF is not about coding, esp. now that code is so cheap. You seem to not be able to distinguish between free software and open source software. Copyleft is needed for free software. For example, you have the case of the iphone. Apple uses free software to restrict users and determine what they can and can't install on the hardware they buy from them. A copyleft license would not allow them to do that. Your deduction techniques are intriguing. You say that the fact that a minority of free software uses non copyleft licenses and manages to exist is somehow a proof that copyleft is useless.
Not upgrading vs. upgrading: Good. Remote vulnerabilities are exploited to create bot nets, and casual home users are the most likely to fall for that kind of thing. Having your computer hijacked means you need a reinstall. Remote vulnerabilities: Bad.
So, having a chance of diminishing the chance of having to reinstall due to a hijacking, without having to upgrade is a good way to save time and/or money.
Well, that is just a lie. Of course, documentation is not that important, but free software is better documented than proprietary software. And of course, its documentation is complete, while proprietary software producers only document what they think you need, it's easy to reach a point where there is no more data to fix your problem. And then there is tech support, I have worked with proprietary tech support. They are great at reading manuals and troubleshooting guides aloud. In 15 years working with both proprietary and free software, only in free software I can get a technical person to help me with my issues. Proprietary support under millions of dollars is just crap.
This post was about free software. If you don't care about free software, it's your problem. Proprietary software affects you a lot more than your coffee maker. At least it's somewhat like environmental issues. Using proprietary software does harm yourself and everybody, both by giving away your freedom, and by acting against technological advancement. Just ignoring it is not going to make it go away. Of course, much like environmental issues, there are wacky ways to create conscience, and there are reasonable ways to do it, but it doesn't mean it's OK that people don't care.
Again, there are no FOSS advocates. There are open source advocates, and free software advocates. Open source advocates are the ones who care about software, and how open source is supposed to bring us lots of technical advantages. Free software advocates, like me, are the wackier ones, that tell you that Google is taking your freedom away and that you should stay away from proprietary software if you want your kids to be free. The first group are the ones that build companies like Redhat, and the ones that helped IBM and Sun change towards open source. People who care about free software don't have a lot to gain from your approach. In my case, I believe free software advocates should start working more in politics and less in the streets, but this kind of event is one of the things that can be done to try and get people to focus on freedom related to software.
I don't believe in charity either. Plan Ceibal is a social program funded by our government, not charity. There are lots of volunteer work that help a lot, but the main effort is government-funded.
What I mean about features vs specs is that Youtube is a real measure of the hardware capacity. Every portable media player can play some kind of video, in some widespread codec. Being able to play full screen Youtube videos is more important than being able to play H.264 MKV files at 12 FPS FULL HD, because most people don't understand that, and they don't know whether it's a good thing, or if it's useless. Nowadays, there is a lot of content published in Youtube. If you want to use video, you need to support Youtube, or create and pay your own infrastructure. It's a big deal. Hardware specs are a lot less important than Youtube capabilities, when it comes to video in internet-capable devices.
They didn't ask people to buy, they offered them for a price. Here, in the "third" world, we are used to paying double for stuff that is cheap in the "first" world. It's called logistics. It's cheaper to sell 100000 for 200 bucks than 1 for 400. If you buy them by the tens/hundreds of thousands, and not for resale, you get a special price. If you just want one, the unit cost is much higher, it implies expensive logistics, warranties and stuff. I don't think they got any money from that G1G1 program, probably they just had it for marketing purposes.
If you search "Plan Ceibal", and skip the lots of promotional videos, you will see some examples of youtube being of use. "Youtube videos" are more important than "flash" video, whatever that means, h.263, h.264 or some other codec. If they are able to use youtube with the new tag, it's just as useful. The thing is being able to play full screen internet video, a function the device has, not a technological spec of the hardware/software.
If I am willing to inherit my grandpa's palace, who built it stealing from everybody else's resources, of course I should be ok with inheriting his "guilt".
I already knew the solution to all Adobe products: scrap the Adobe product, and use something better. The issue was that my boss asked a very respected consultant who said otherwise. I was just going through the procedure in order to get permission to go against his opinion.
Or, maybe, we could get over this notion that guilt is hereditary and stop asking people to apologise for things that were done by others often before they were born.
Well, in the case of invasions, empires and stuff, goods and property were inherited, so guilt should, too. I live in South America, descend from Basque immigrants, and I believe most of us are to blame for the extermination of the native people in my country. We are to blame, because we benefit from their land. Most Europeans are to blame, for lots of stuff that is wrong in Latin America because their current riches are inherited partly from stuff they got from the work of South American people, destroying most of their cities and culture in the process.
I've been using Photoshop since, oh, version 4. Adobe has never had anything resembling 'support' for any of it's products.
I don't agree with you. I had to call support for an Acrobat OCR product, and a girl with a beautiful CostaRican accent got to read the same manual page for me, several times. Of course, I ended up just using another product with a less recognized brand, but that did resemble support. Shitty support, but support nevertheless.
Slashdot Mirror
No way.
The challenge to find a currently wrong article that has been for more than a week is in fact a lot harder if you don't change the wording.
It's not a technicality, it's the spirit of the thing. The relaxed collection from which you picked the article is at least a hundred times larger than the collection in the challenge. That is what makes it so difficult to find an example. He didn't say there weren't any articles that were wrong for more than a week, but that there were so few of them that no one would find them. (hint: he said "more reliable", not "perfect")
I am from Uruguay and we are fine right now.
We have Venezuela as a business partner and have a good relationship with them, although a lot less than with Brazil, Argentina, China and the US, which are larger partners.
You cite Antonini Wilson's suitcase as a proof that Chavez financed Argentina.
In the same thread where you ask for the US to intervene in Latin American internal affairs.
Chavez says that case was a set-up, with the US doing what you think they should be doing. Trying to get right of those damn commies.
In favor of the US version documented in Wikipedia there is the fact that Chavez _is_ capable of such kind of thing.
In favor of the non-US version: going through customs with that suitcase was unnecessary. Also, Antonini Wilson is too good a friend with US intelligence and is free after trying to smuggle 800 thousand dollars. That might lead some people to think he might be a US agent. Plus, US intelligence is not only capable of doing such a thing, but a lot more, because we saw them, and their own files confirm it.
Of course, if Antonini Wilson was judged in Venezuela, or even in Argentina, I wouldn't give a lot of credit to the process either, because this is an intelligence issue, not a legal issue. The people involved will do anything to protect their interests, and courts are not above that.
(About wikipedia having the US version: I don't mean wikipedia is somehow biased as a whole. I mean _that_ wikipedia page you cite is of very low encyclopedic quality. It's built from a small collection of facts, and media coverage, a lot of hypotheses, and doesn't take account of all the media saying that Antonini Wilson might be a US agent.
An example of bad edition is that in the abstract, the article implies that Venezuelan agents arrested in the US pledged guilty of pressuring Antonini Wilson, when the cited fact is that they pledged guilty of acting as intelligence agents.
)
Don't get me wrong, I don't like Chavez either, but I know some Latin American history and he doesn't rank at the top ten worse Latin American presidents.
About Honduras... well, they did it against those f'n commies, you're right.
What I think is that democracy is too fragile to mess with it. Other countries should not support a coup.
I wonder when is the US going to do anything serious about the democracy deterioration in latin america.
The list of countries where democracy is falling apart is growing year by year. First it was only Cuba, but then Venezuela's Chavez joined the club. Chavez is so determined in exporting his ideology that he has successfully used the country's wealth to build alliances and undermine democracy in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and in less measure Argentina, and now he is trying really hard in Honduras, Peru and Colombia.
The US have done a lot about what you call "democracy deterioration" in Latin America, mostly in the seventies.
I assume you really mean they should do something about those f'n commies.
They did something back in the seventies, do you remember? A bit from the wikipedia:
From wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor )
Operation Condor (Spanish: Operación Cóndor, Portuguese: Operação Condor), was a campaign of political repression involving assassination and intelligence operations officially implemented in 1975 by the governments of the Southern Cone of South America. The program aimed to eradicate alleged socialist and communist influence and ideas and to control active or potential opposition movements against the participating right-wing governments.[citation needed] Due to its clandestine nature, the precise number of deaths directly attributable to Operation Condor will likely never be known, but it is reported to have caused over sixty thousand [1], possibly even more.[2][3][4]
Condor's key members were the governments in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Brazil. The United States participated in a supervisory capacity, with Ecuador and Peru joining later in more peripheral roles.[5]
I don't think the US should do anything outside their borders. We are fine as we are right now.
Bolivia is a healthy democracy that recently confirmed its government. Ecuador is also. Saying that Chavez can influence Argentina is an insult to Argentina as a regional power.
About Honduras... I don't know what you think about Honduras, but Chavez is very much in line about that issue with Brazil and the rest of Mercosur. And I hope you are not trying to say that Chavez is forcing his interests on Brazil.
But you're in a problem domain that would have required calculus even if it you were solving the problem with rulers and graph paper. If you were working with accounting software, you'd do much better if you knew the generally accepted accounting principles... but do CS courses teach that? No.
I don't know about calculus, but some logic would have taught you to stop answering your own questions.
I've seen examples where third parties require cookies to analyze the usage patterns of users on client sites but I don't require logs to understand usage trends on sites where I have easy access to log files. In fact, I think usability testing would reveal more than analysis of usage data.
No way.
Usage data is a direct measure, while user tests are a very rough estimate.
Tracking usage is key if you want to have a website that is good for its users.
So real situation: Someone opens up a wireless network with open access in one block of the town. Someone (very probably) did something illegal with it. The people who pay for the connection get a letter saying there is illegal usage being made of it and decide to shut it down.
You are right, too much spin.
Anyhow, it's interesting to stop and think what we are talking about, like if we weren't used to this kind of thing.
Several people lost their free internet access because in their country it is illegal to _download_ a movie.
That kind of law does not seem to be doing much in favor of the advancement of society.
I understand that it's their country, and they can go wherever they want with their laws, but it seems a braindead srategy, from the outside.
Maybe I underestimate the importance of the entertainment industry, or overestimate the importance of a medium like the internet, but it seems ridiculous to me.
It seems canonical is more interested to show they can deliver something on time, rather than delivering something good when it's ready or delaying the release until proper QA is done.
That is kind of dumb.
Ubuntu releases polished LTS versions every two years, with good QA, so you can deploy them in an enterprise environment, with paid support available, and a sensible upgrade path.
In between, they release other versions for users for whom new software is more important than QA, and we like it.
They do deliver what we expect, and on time too.
The App Store is not like a record store in a mall... in case you haven't noticed in real life you have choices.
The app store is like the state-run department store in some communist country, where everything is approved by the loving hand of the state lest you be exposed to anything counter-revolutionary. But don't worry, we have everything you need comrade! Ignore the capitalist scum, demanding freedom.
You talk about a typical capitalist monopoly and get confused by saying that it is somehow like a communist regime. The computer industry is capitalism at its best, with its pros and its cons.
A totalitarian regime would either not let you access the store, or give you everything preloaded, and pushed by the central administration.
The communist (not sovietic, Marx-style communist), version of the apple store would be more like a only GPLv3 wiki-store where you have to pay apps with code or testing.
I wonder if people from 2050 er 2060 where did the decade go? from 50 years in the future came back in time to now and dropped their latest microchip, if it would even be useful? Sure, they have picometer circuits, but so what? We still don't know how to make them.
But Skynet does.
Afghanis didn't ask to be liberated.
Which Afghanis? The women being beaten and killed for attending school? The families fleeing across the border to escape the Taliban?
Or do you mean the warlords and friends? Because they're quite happy there...
Remember that women were not beaten and killed any more in Afghanistan for attending school _before_ US invasion. They are now, _after_ the invasion. And they get to wear burkas.
Invading a country is not cool. For instance, Iraqis were living a lot better under Saddam than now. It's been 8 years. 8 years could have been enough in this time to get rid of him, and let someone better in power, without killing so many Iraqis.
While that is a good idea, choose wisely your atheists, watch out for nihilists, they might not even care.
You seem to not be able to distinguish between free software and open source software.
Copyleft is needed for free software.
No, you're not going to drag me into that semantic cesspool. Sorry. I've spent a couple of years studying the methodology of cults, and one of the things which they do, that I know about, is what is called "loading of the language."
It's a technique where either entirely new terms are invented, primarily for the purpose of creating seperation between the cult and the outside world, or, more insidiously, where existing words are given a new, internal, cultic definition.
The fact that you are thinking in terms of Stallman's terminology, and trying to foist it on me here, tells me that you are a cultist; and cultists are people I have very little time for, primarily for the reason that attempting to argue with mind control is an almost entirely futile exercise.
I kinda agree with you in principle.
Of course semantics is the issue here.
The thing is that I don't think I am the one inventing new words. I was actually responding to your usage of that "FOSS" term, because that's exactly what I think it is, a semantic game that changes the center of the discussion.
Stallman started using "free software" as in freedom, to talk about software that does not restrict your freedom. It's not a technical term, it's more philosophical, and in real life it it a legal thing, more than anything. I don't think it had a former meaning. "free software" as in "free beer" is and was not really relevant to take precedence over this. Esp. because most unpaid software that is not free software is not actually "no cost" in principle.
Maybe I am biased because I speak Spanish, for us it's clear what "software libre" means, and it can only have one meaning.
Then, other people invented the "open source" term. It means another thing. Open source is a technical term, for people who focus at that kind of thing.
Then, other people came up the "FOSS" term. The thing is that I think _that_ term is loaded, because they say "FOSS" when people are talking about free software. Than means they can start using technical arguments, and so they divert te discussion. Free software is a legal thing.
When I insist on not using the relatively new "FOSS" term I am trying not to talk about the technical aspects, and try to focus on legal aspects. I really care about people knowing that there _are_ legal aspects of using software.
People know that they have to pay for licenses, even though it's not technically necessary. That is not a technical issue, that's a legal thing. Well, people who care about free software care about people thinking about other legal consequences of using software, and taking that into account.
You might be smart enough not to buy an iphone if it's now what your need, but someone who does not know or care about the issues of a proprietary platform, might not be able to know whether it's the best choice for them. And those are the people who set the standards.
Anyhow, my point about the iphone is that it's a case where free software is used to restrict what users can do with stuff they buy. With copyleft, that could not happen. That is the different. If someone wrote free software with an "open source" mindset, because of a technical motivation, that is OK. If they had intended to write free software, with purpose of providing a free software platform with the legal advantages it has, that would be a FAIL, because of the lack of copyleft.
Linux is a kernel, and it's not a consumer product. It's a software project, but it doesn't even have a price.
Market concepts are not universal in principle, and also they don't apply that easily to free things.
You don't seem to understand the concept of usability. Windows is not usable if you analyze it by formal usability metrics, and it has a great market share. Usability is not all. For example, familiarity is even more important. Interoperability costs are important too.
Ubuntu would need to be a lot better to get people to switch. Right now it's only better.
Well, my girlfriend would differ.
For actual casual users, there is no issue with using Ubuntu vs a working version of windows.
Firefox starts from the same icon, photo software looks the same and works the same. Ipod synchronization just works. Simple games are included.
In my experience, Windows machines require either a very experienced windows user, or someone that does routine maintenance. My current machine was installed with ubuntu 5.10 and survived lots of software and hardware upgrades and 2 diskdrive crashes (I backup with dd), without wasting time in maintenance.
The FSF is not about coding, esp. now that code is so cheap.
You seem to not be able to distinguish between free software and open source software.
Copyleft is needed for free software.
For example, you have the case of the iphone. Apple uses free software to restrict users and determine what they can and can't install on the hardware they buy from them. A copyleft license would not allow them to do that.
Your deduction techniques are intriguing. You say that the fact that a minority of free software uses non copyleft licenses and manages to exist is somehow a proof that copyleft is useless.
Not upgrading vs. upgrading: Good.
Remote vulnerabilities are exploited to create bot nets, and casual home users are the most likely to fall for that kind of thing. Having your computer hijacked means you need a reinstall.
Remote vulnerabilities: Bad.
So, having a chance of diminishing the chance of having to reinstall due to a hijacking, without having to upgrade is a good way to save time and/or money.
"terrible documented"
Well, that is just a lie.
Of course, documentation is not that important, but free software is better documented than proprietary software.
And of course, its documentation is complete, while proprietary software producers only document what they think you need, it's easy to reach a point where there is no more data to fix your problem.
And then there is tech support, I have worked with proprietary tech support. They are great at reading manuals and troubleshooting guides aloud. In 15 years working with both proprietary and free software, only in free software I can get a technical person to help me with my issues. Proprietary support under millions of dollars is just crap.
This post was about free software. If you don't care about free software, it's your problem. Proprietary software affects you a lot more than your coffee maker. At least it's somewhat like environmental issues. Using proprietary software does harm yourself and everybody, both by giving away your freedom, and by acting against technological advancement. Just ignoring it is not going to make it go away. Of course, much like environmental issues, there are wacky ways to create conscience, and there are reasonable ways to do it, but it doesn't mean it's OK that people don't care.
Again, there are no FOSS advocates.
There are open source advocates, and free software advocates.
Open source advocates are the ones who care about software, and how open source is supposed to bring us lots of technical advantages.
Free software advocates, like me, are the wackier ones, that tell you that Google is taking your freedom away and that you should stay away from proprietary software if you want your kids to be free.
The first group are the ones that build companies like Redhat, and the ones that helped IBM and Sun change towards open source.
People who care about free software don't have a lot to gain from your approach. In my case, I believe free software advocates should start working more in politics and less in the streets, but this kind of event is one of the things that can be done to try and get people to focus on freedom related to software.
I don't believe in charity either. Plan Ceibal is a social program funded by our government, not charity.
There are lots of volunteer work that help a lot, but the main effort is government-funded.
What I mean about features vs specs is that Youtube is a real measure of the hardware capacity.
Every portable media player can play some kind of video, in some widespread codec.
Being able to play full screen Youtube videos is more important than being able to play H.264 MKV files at 12 FPS FULL HD, because most people don't understand that, and they don't know whether it's a good thing, or if it's useless.
Nowadays, there is a lot of content published in Youtube. If you want to use video, you need to support Youtube, or create and pay your own infrastructure. It's a big deal. Hardware specs are a lot less important than Youtube capabilities, when it comes to video in internet-capable devices.
They didn't ask people to buy, they offered them for a price. Here, in the "third" world, we are used to paying double for stuff that is cheap in the "first" world. It's called logistics. It's cheaper to sell 100000 for 200 bucks than 1 for 400.
If you buy them by the tens/hundreds of thousands, and not for resale, you get a special price.
If you just want one, the unit cost is much higher, it implies expensive logistics, warranties and stuff.
I don't think they got any money from that G1G1 program, probably they just had it for marketing purposes.
This video shows some XO's maintenace tips.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns4RgDBPR80
If you search "Plan Ceibal", and skip the lots of promotional videos, you will see some examples of youtube being of use.
"Youtube videos" are more important than "flash" video, whatever that means, h.263, h.264 or some other codec. If they are able to use youtube with the new tag, it's just as useful. The thing is being able to play full screen internet video, a function the device has, not a technological spec of the hardware/software.
Read my post again.
We are fine in my country, thank you very much.
We have reasonable leaders, and reasonable standards of living.
We have good education, universal healthcare, low unemployment, and were not hit by the so-called "global" crisis.
What I meant is that _we_ are to blame for the extermination of native people, because we inherited everything our ancestors took from them, by force. And the same goes for Spanish people now, and English people, who also benefit from the exploitation of people and resources here. If they had not "colonized" América, they would have had to finance their development only through commerce, and just direct transferral of resources.
If I am willing to inherit my grandpa's palace, who built it stealing from everybody else's resources, of course I should be ok with inheriting his "guilt".
I already knew the solution to all Adobe products: scrap the Adobe product, and use something better.
The issue was that my boss asked a very respected consultant who said otherwise. I was just going through the procedure in order to get permission to go against his opinion.
Or, maybe, we could get over this notion that guilt is hereditary and stop asking people to apologise for things that were done by others often before they were born.
Well, in the case of invasions, empires and stuff, goods and property were inherited, so guilt should, too.
I live in South America, descend from Basque immigrants, and I believe most of us are to blame for the extermination of the native people in my country. We are to blame, because we benefit from their land. Most Europeans are to blame, for lots of stuff that is wrong in Latin America because their current riches are inherited partly from stuff they got from the work of South American people, destroying most of their cities and culture in the process.
I've been using Photoshop since, oh, version 4. Adobe has never had anything resembling 'support' for any of it's products.
I don't agree with you.
I had to call support for an Acrobat OCR product, and a girl with a beautiful CostaRican accent got to read the same manual page for me, several times.
Of course, I ended up just using another product with a less recognized brand, but that did resemble support. Shitty support, but support nevertheless.