That's what a lot of folk said (and some still do say) about drinking and driving when it was first outlawed.
And people *still* say it. Hell, I see people around here bitching all the time about BAC levels and how *they're* fine, so the laws are stupid. And that's with a chemical that demonstrably impairs neurological function. Now try to convince these same jackasses when it's "just texting"...
Gah, "Free software" does not mean what you think it means. It does not mean "give away the software for free." Even using the GPL with FLOSS you are completely at will to charge for your software and no one will look down on you for it.
You, my friend, are playing with words to try and defend in indefensible position.
"Free software", using GPLv3 as a baseline, requires that an individual be able to:
a) Get the source for software they run, b) Produce binaries from that source, and c) Run those binaries without restriction.
The minute you give the user this power, they can produce their own binaries and give them away for free, at which point the genie is out of the bottle and the revenue-through-software-sales model vanishes. Period.
There's a reason why companies like Red Hat and Ubuntu have enterprise editions: support is, fundamentally, one of the few ways to make money on open source software, as any attempt to charge for the product will ultimately lead to a free fork being made.
However, this also ignores the simple fact that most of the people who pirated an app wouldn't have shelled out money for it.
I'm actually not convinced of that when you start taking micropayments into account.
Sure, for a game that costs $15, a user who pirates it might be doing it to save some money, and with the pirated copy unavailable, would simply have not bought it. But when you're talking a couple bucks, I find it *far* less credible that users are turning to piracy because they can't afford the purchase, or don't see the product as having sufficient value to justify the price.
Are you going to buy something if you can't at least kick the tires first?
Eh, as has been pointed out many times, the android marketplace has a 24-hour refund period. Combine that with user reviews, and I'm sorry, the try-before-you-buy justification for piracy just doesn't hold water.
And let's be honest - a lot of these utilities should eventually make their way into the OS anyway.
Oh, well, then that totally justifies piracy...::rollseyes::
It's *99 cents*, ffs. Read the user reviews, and if no one is complaining about anything relevant, buy the fuckin' thing. Honestly, people are willing to drop 5 bucks on a cup of coffee that a) is entirely transient, and b) could very well completely fucking suck, but apparently paying 99 cents for an app is just too darn risky...
Nah, that's BS. MSNBC is biased as hell, no doubt about it. But I've never come across a credible instance where they've flat out, unequivocally lied to their viewership, something that FOX has absolutely done (and, I once again repeat, has gone to court in order to defend their right to do so).
All the news companies are populated by lying sacks of shit (yes, even NPR). Why does FOX get singled out?
Okay, well, you find another news organization that regularly attempts to deceive it's viewership, not just through simple spin, but by actually creating new facts out of whole cloth, and you might have a point. But I suspect you're gonna have a little trouble.
FOX news aren't simple spin artists. They're liars and propagandists, and actually had the audacity to defend their right to lie to their viewers in a fucking court of law. No other organization is so bald faced in their lying, so actively deceptive, so transparently partisan and unobjective in their news reporting (note, I distinguish this from the talking heads, who are universally liars and spin artists, at least to some degree).
FOX is Republican (or Libertariaan) leaning and people don't like Republicans/Libertarians.
Please.
People don't like FOX because FOX is populated by lying sacks of shit. Just look at how the mosque situation in NYC was handled: they attempt (badly) to link the Imam to a Saudi who supposedly funds terror, with no basis for their claims. And on top of it, their fucking hypocrites, conveniently neglecting to point out that that very same Saudi owns the second largest share of FOX corporate.
If they were just partisan, fine, so be it. But they actually *manufacture* news out of whole cloth... and in fact went to court (and won) to defend their right to do so!
What's the open competitor to the aforementioned consoles? What can I drag out to play video games on when my friends visit without PCs in tow?
Way to artificially limit the discussion. Why would you exclude PCs as an option, given that's the obvious solution? Particularly given the high-powered, compact options available these days? Just get yourself a Revo and a couple USB joysticks, plug it into an HDMI-equipped display, and enjoy.
They'll make choices that meet their needs, sure, but were systems this locked down ~20 years ago when I got into computers, I'd probably have gotten nowhere at all.
And, once again, I repeat, if the consumers don't like it, *they'll choose an alternative*.
20 years ago, lockdown was the norm. Finding a fucking *compiler* that didn't cost hundreds or thousands of dollars was completely impossible. But things changed. Why? Consumer choice.
So if the consumers don't like it, they'll choose something else. Meanwhile, there will always be niche products that are hackable, just as there's always been.
Frankly, the computing industry has *never been this healthy*. There's a broader choice of hardware vendor and operating system than there has ever been. Period. WinMo, WebOS, iOS, BBOS, Android, QNX, Symbian, soon MeeGo... the environment for competition and innovation is stunning. And if it turns out that that the locked down platforms become too onerous, then the open ones will win. End of story.
I know they aren't like me. That doesn't justify Apple's (and Microsoft's, and Motorola's...) lock down. It serves only them and no one else.
I disagree. While I don't like involuntary lockdown (ie, I prefer the option to unlock my device if I so choose), lockdown serves one important purpose: It drastically decreases the likelihood of malware infecting the platform. You may see that as an insufficient excuse, but if I ever handed a computer to my grandmother, I'd rather it be a locked down iPad than a Windows PC that's rooted in her first five minutes reading spam from Nigeria.
Pragmatic, or foolish?
If the device works for them, it's pragmatic, end of story.
All this does is push Apple to pursue the locked down route more and more heavily.
Then don't buy Apple's hardware. That's the joy of choice, there's always a competitor, and if Apple's heavy hand becomes too much, people will move to another platform (like, say, Android).
Then where will people be?
Bailing and buying different hardware.
Seriously, you seem to live with this delusion that people are, apparently, under some form of mind control that prevents them from making choices that meet their needs. If Apple no longer meets their needs, they'll find another product. That's the beauty of a healthy marketplace.
So quit being so god damned paranoid and fatalistic. Enjoy the choices you've made, and let others enjoy theirs. And if Apple ties the noose around their own neck, you can feel free to dance around the corpse.
Ah, I see, so once you're a parent, your sense of humour is carved out of your skull? You're suddenly no longer able to see the humour in a situation that is both tragic and, ultimately, joyful?
Indeed, it's easy to ignore the minority, especially if they have a point.
I grant, you have a point. But while you look at the rest of the world and wonder "why isn't everyone like me?", the rest of the world looks at you and thinks "wow, that guy is kinda nuts".
It's sorta like how most people view RMS. Is he, in his way, admirable? Yes. But he's an insane, impractical zealot. 'course, the world needs insane, impractical zealots, but they're zealots nonetheless, and can never, and likely will never, fully understand what drives normal, average people.
So, keep being a zealot. There's nothing wrong with that. But there's nothing "tragic" about people choosing a more pragmatic path for themselves.
First, buying an N900 and an iPaq puts you in such a tiny group I think we can safely ignore your opinions, as you're clearly a zealot to begin with. And yet you still bought an iPod, while railing against Apple... bizarre.
Meanwhile, have you or have you not bought videogame console or handheld?
It's only "already jailbroken" because the same iOS 4.1 issue used with the iOS 4.1 jailbreak that has already been developed works on this device, which is also running iOS 4.1.
Not quite. The jailbreak currently being worked on is actually based on a bootloader hole. So this thing is already jailbroken presumably because it uses the same firmware as the iPhone, iPad, and Touch.
An operation like Wikileaks has to present a cohesive, united front. They can have all the internal debates they want but they can't appear to be bickering and disunited in public.
Why? Because you say so?
Please.
WikiLeaks is an interesting organization, but they aren't an army. Frankly, I'm baffled you even made that comparison...
Which is deliciously ironic... apparently the seekers of transparency, themselves, need not be transparent. Nice.
Meanwhile, Assange's paranoid need to root out this defector is clearly preventing wikileaks from actually doing the job they exist to do, as evidenced by that very transcript.
At least half a dozen WikiLeaks staffers have tendered their resignations in recent weeks
And this:
Snorrason, the Icelandic university student, resigned after he challenged Assange on his decision to suspend Domscheit-Berg and was bluntly rebuked.
Are lies? Alright, where's *your* proof? I mean, if this is an outright fabrication, there must be published quotes countering these statements somewhere. Right? So where are they? The only thing I've found is a twit from Assange where we confirms that Domscheit-Berg was suspended, which only serves to confirm the contents of the transcript.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what a lot of folk said (and some still do say) about drinking and driving when it was first outlawed.
And people *still* say it. Hell, I see people around here bitching all the time about BAC levels and how *they're* fine, so the laws are stupid. And that's with a chemical that demonstrably impairs neurological function. Now try to convince these same jackasses when it's "just texting"...
People are dumb. Really *really* fucking dumb.
I see, so your game, here, is to ignore all the studies and assume your gutfeel is right.
Uhuh.
How *very* compelling...
ROFL, and who do you suppose contributes to, for example, Linux, Open Office, or Mozilla? Oh yeah... *paid developers*.
Gah, "Free software" does not mean what you think it means. It does not mean "give away the software for free." Even using the GPL with FLOSS you are completely at will to charge for your software and no one will look down on you for it.
You, my friend, are playing with words to try and defend in indefensible position.
"Free software", using GPLv3 as a baseline, requires that an individual be able to:
a) Get the source for software they run,
b) Produce binaries from that source, and
c) Run those binaries without restriction.
The minute you give the user this power, they can produce their own binaries and give them away for free, at which point the genie is out of the bottle and the revenue-through-software-sales model vanishes. Period.
There's a reason why companies like Red Hat and Ubuntu have enterprise editions: support is, fundamentally, one of the few ways to make money on open source software, as any attempt to charge for the product will ultimately lead to a free fork being made.
However, this also ignores the simple fact that most of the people who pirated an app wouldn't have shelled out money for it.
I'm actually not convinced of that when you start taking micropayments into account.
Sure, for a game that costs $15, a user who pirates it might be doing it to save some money, and with the pirated copy unavailable, would simply have not bought it. But when you're talking a couple bucks, I find it *far* less credible that users are turning to piracy because they can't afford the purchase, or don't see the product as having sufficient value to justify the price.
Are you going to buy something if you can't at least kick the tires first?
Eh, as has been pointed out many times, the android marketplace has a 24-hour refund period. Combine that with user reviews, and I'm sorry, the try-before-you-buy justification for piracy just doesn't hold water.
And let's be honest - a lot of these utilities should eventually make their way into the OS anyway.
Oh, well, then that totally justifies piracy... ::rollseyes::
Does everyone have one of those?
Umm... yes. Of course.
Well, unless you're 13 years old or mentally unfit...
It's *99 cents*, ffs. Read the user reviews, and if no one is complaining about anything relevant, buy the fuckin' thing. Honestly, people are willing to drop 5 bucks on a cup of coffee that a) is entirely transient, and b) could very well completely fucking suck, but apparently paying 99 cents for an app is just too darn risky...
Nah, that's BS. MSNBC is biased as hell, no doubt about it. But I've never come across a credible instance where they've flat out, unequivocally lied to their viewership, something that FOX has absolutely done (and, I once again repeat, has gone to court in order to defend their right to do so).
All the news companies are populated by lying sacks of shit (yes, even NPR). Why does FOX get singled out?
Okay, well, you find another news organization that regularly attempts to deceive it's viewership, not just through simple spin, but by actually creating new facts out of whole cloth, and you might have a point. But I suspect you're gonna have a little trouble.
FOX news aren't simple spin artists. They're liars and propagandists, and actually had the audacity to defend their right to lie to their viewers in a fucking court of law. No other organization is so bald faced in their lying, so actively deceptive, so transparently partisan and unobjective in their news reporting (note, I distinguish this from the talking heads, who are universally liars and spin artists, at least to some degree).
FOX is Republican (or Libertariaan) leaning and people don't like Republicans/Libertarians.
Please.
People don't like FOX because FOX is populated by lying sacks of shit. Just look at how the mosque situation in NYC was handled: they attempt (badly) to link the Imam to a Saudi who supposedly funds terror, with no basis for their claims. And on top of it, their fucking hypocrites, conveniently neglecting to point out that that very same Saudi owns the second largest share of FOX corporate.
If they were just partisan, fine, so be it. But they actually *manufacture* news out of whole cloth... and in fact went to court (and won) to defend their right to do so!
So then firewall them away. Is that *really* so hard? Or are you just incompetent?
Here on planet earth, 20 years ago:
Yes, I'm aware I'm old. I actually meant 30 years ago, during the dawn of the computer era... alas my math hasn't caught up with my age. :(
There are many situations that will still require NAT on IPv6.
Such as?
What's the open competitor to the aforementioned consoles? What can I drag out to play video games on when my friends visit without PCs in tow?
Way to artificially limit the discussion. Why would you exclude PCs as an option, given that's the obvious solution? Particularly given the high-powered, compact options available these days? Just get yourself a Revo and a couple USB joysticks, plug it into an HDMI-equipped display, and enjoy.
They'll make choices that meet their needs, sure, but were systems this locked down ~20 years ago when I got into computers, I'd probably have gotten nowhere at all.
And, once again, I repeat, if the consumers don't like it, *they'll choose an alternative*.
20 years ago, lockdown was the norm. Finding a fucking *compiler* that didn't cost hundreds or thousands of dollars was completely impossible. But things changed. Why? Consumer choice.
So if the consumers don't like it, they'll choose something else. Meanwhile, there will always be niche products that are hackable, just as there's always been.
Frankly, the computing industry has *never been this healthy*. There's a broader choice of hardware vendor and operating system than there has ever been. Period. WinMo, WebOS, iOS, BBOS, Android, QNX, Symbian, soon MeeGo... the environment for competition and innovation is stunning. And if it turns out that that the locked down platforms become too onerous, then the open ones will win. End of story.
I know they aren't like me. That doesn't justify Apple's (and Microsoft's, and Motorola's...) lock down. It serves only them and no one else.
I disagree. While I don't like involuntary lockdown (ie, I prefer the option to unlock my device if I so choose), lockdown serves one important purpose: It drastically decreases the likelihood of malware infecting the platform. You may see that as an insufficient excuse, but if I ever handed a computer to my grandmother, I'd rather it be a locked down iPad than a Windows PC that's rooted in her first five minutes reading spam from Nigeria.
Pragmatic, or foolish?
If the device works for them, it's pragmatic, end of story.
All this does is push Apple to pursue the locked down route more and more heavily.
Then don't buy Apple's hardware. That's the joy of choice, there's always a competitor, and if Apple's heavy hand becomes too much, people will move to another platform (like, say, Android).
Then where will people be?
Bailing and buying different hardware.
Seriously, you seem to live with this delusion that people are, apparently, under some form of mind control that prevents them from making choices that meet their needs. If Apple no longer meets their needs, they'll find another product. That's the beauty of a healthy marketplace.
So quit being so god damned paranoid and fatalistic. Enjoy the choices you've made, and let others enjoy theirs. And if Apple ties the noose around their own neck, you can feel free to dance around the corpse.
Ah, I see, so once you're a parent, your sense of humour is carved out of your skull? You're suddenly no longer able to see the humour in a situation that is both tragic and, ultimately, joyful?
Wow... you're really marketing parenthood well, there, buddy.
Indeed, it's easy to ignore the minority, especially if they have a point.
I grant, you have a point. But while you look at the rest of the world and wonder "why isn't everyone like me?", the rest of the world looks at you and thinks "wow, that guy is kinda nuts".
It's sorta like how most people view RMS. Is he, in his way, admirable? Yes. But he's an insane, impractical zealot. 'course, the world needs insane, impractical zealots, but they're zealots nonetheless, and can never, and likely will never, fully understand what drives normal, average people.
So, keep being a zealot. There's nothing wrong with that. But there's nothing "tragic" about people choosing a more pragmatic path for themselves.
First, buying an N900 and an iPaq puts you in such a tiny group I think we can safely ignore your opinions, as you're clearly a zealot to begin with. And yet you still bought an iPod, while railing against Apple... bizarre.
Meanwhile, have you or have you not bought videogame console or handheld?
It's only "already jailbroken" because the same iOS 4.1 issue used with the iOS 4.1 jailbreak that has already been developed works on this device, which is also running iOS 4.1.
Not quite. The jailbreak currently being worked on is actually based on a bootloader hole. So this thing is already jailbroken presumably because it uses the same firmware as the iPhone, iPad, and Touch.
No kidding!
So I can only assume you've never bought a videogame console, right? Or a handheld videogame system... or a cell phone... or a PMP.. or a PDA...
An operation like Wikileaks has to present a cohesive, united front. They can have all the internal debates they want but they can't appear to be bickering and disunited in public.
Why? Because you say so?
Please.
WikiLeaks is an interesting organization, but they aren't an army. Frankly, I'm baffled you even made that comparison...
Instead, his only concern is the leak itself
Which is deliciously ironic... apparently the seekers of transparency, themselves, need not be transparent. Nice.
Meanwhile, Assange's paranoid need to root out this defector is clearly preventing wikileaks from actually doing the job they exist to do, as evidenced by that very transcript.
Gotcha, mindless denialism is the name of the game, here.
Wait a second... Julian? Is that you??
So you're saying this quote:
And this:
Are lies? Alright, where's *your* proof? I mean, if this is an outright fabrication, there must be published quotes countering these statements somewhere. Right? So where are they? The only thing I've found is a twit from Assange where we confirms that Domscheit-Berg was suspended, which only serves to confirm the contents of the transcript.