Firstly, it's that the anger seems to be directed purely at Jews who circumcise infants,
Bullshit. The article is about Israel, so naturally judaism is the subject, here, but the anger is directed at the practice of circumcision, a practice that happens to be rooted in judeo-christian beliefs. So yes, it's anger directed at Jews, *because* they practice circumcision. I'm sure if you were to ask the OP, he'd express the same anger toward *anyone* who promoted the forced excision of healthy tissue from individuals unable to give their consent.
Secondly, the argument against 'mutilation' is that this is a relatively common and routine procedure.
That's not an argument against defining it as mutilation. That's simply an argument for normalizing it. Or are you saying that any practice accepted by a culture, no matter how abhorrent, can't be described as "mutilation"?
Labial 'circumcision' is not (to my knowledge) performed as a routine procedure.
It is in some African cultures. Why do you think there was such an uproar over the issue?
According to your argument, African cultures that practice female genital mutilation are perfectly right to do so, as it's "tradition". Of course, that view is utterly absurd. What we're talking about, here, is the excision of healthy tissue from the human body for absolutely no justifiable reason. Which wouldn't be so bad if the procedure were only performed on consenting adults, but the procedure is primarily performed on infants.
I have family members that were circumcised in their pre-teen years due to repeated infections
If you can't see the difference between a surgical procedure performed for valid medical reasons, and one performed simply because of tradition, there's no hope for you.
That's the real problem here. Other religions may inspire some fanatics, but Scientology is run by fanatics.
Funny, I would've characterized it as an organization run by savvy business people who don't want the Church's revenue stream interrupted, and realize that stirring up fanaticism among the middle ranks, who then keep the lower ranked folks in line, is the best way to protect their profit margin.
For the record, I happen to agree with you that cults and religions are clearly not equivalent. But I wonder... you said this:
Never mind that the cult copyrights its secret texts and demands money for them, while religions' holy literature is freely available. Never mind that the cult breaks the law willy-nilly.
So, what about the Catholic church back in the days when the bible wasn't available to the masses, and sins could be expunged with an appropriately sized donation to the local diocese?
1) Postgres is C and not C++. I find that I can write code in C++ nowadays much faster then I can in C (and it comes out just as fast, the C++ "is slow" is an archaic view).
Buh? Since when has anybody said that? Ugly, yes. Byzantine, yes. Convoluted, hell yes. But slow? No, of course not.
Exactly! For example, here in Canada, it's impossible to buy food that's bad for you! All they sell at the grocery stores is vegetables and low-fat yogurt! No really, it's true, I swear!
Right, that's the idea... go back to lard. You get better results, and it's better for you. I'd be amazed if higher-end restaurants weren't already doing just that.
Uhuh... and yet, you still haven't explained why epub is an "awful thing". PDF is an absolutely *horrible* ebook format, save for *very* specific types of documents (technical literature, in particular, where fixed layout is very important).
Let me introduce you to three words: Local privilege exploit.
And by the way, Mr. Jobs fellater, someone who suggests the possibility that a virus could infect an iPhone isn't an "apple-hater". It's called being "realistic".
Why is the Wii controller even mentioned in this freakin' story? The kid shot themselves with a loaded gun left laying around by the parent.
Because a kid getting shot by a loaded gun left lying around isn't really news. However, a kid getting shot by a loaded gun they thought was a Wii controller? Well that puts a whole new spin on an otherwise fairly mundane story that's been played out time and time again.
Legally, no. But morally? Well, I beg to differ: those companies generate millions of dollars a year and would be in a completely different situation right now if they didn't have OpenSSH to benefit from.
Uh, so what? Those developers *chose* to release their code under a license which creates absolutely no obligation on the part of the user. They made that choice because they feel that open, free code is a good thing. So if their users don't give them any cash, why should they be surprised or offended? Meanwhile, why should those users feel any obligation whatsoever? The developers make the choice to donate their time. If the project isn't financially viable, that's hardly their problem.
By your logic, I should expect local pet owners to give me a little cash because I volunteer at the local humane society. Of course, that's ridiculous, because I choose to donate my time without any expectation of a financial quid pro quo. The openssh developers are no different.
In the 10 years since the inception of the OpenSSH project, these companies have contributed not even a dime of thanks in support of the OpenSSH project (despite numerous requests).
And they don't have to, either morally or legally.
OpenSSH is released under the BSD license, and the devs know full well that they may not be financially rewarded for their work. To suddenly expect those users to donate cash just because they use the very code you freed is, to say, the least, hypocritical. After all, if you wanted to be paid for the work you do, why are you releasing it for free to the world under one of the most liberal software licenses possible? Why not a dual license that requires payment for commercial use? Naturally because the BSDs are all about freedom, of course.
Well, unless they think they're getting screwed financially.
Do you really believe that anything the EU does is going to prevent the US from rather forcibly letting the world know that the IP manuactured in the US isn't going to be passed around for free? Dream on. You are talking about a huge economy that is responsible for the well-being of nearly a half a billion people.
Yeah:
GDP (Nominal): EU - US $14.51 trillion (2009 est.) US - US $14.266 trillion (2009)
Population: EU - 491,582,852 (July 2009 est.) US - 307,212,123 (July 2009 est.)
Sorry buddy, the days are over when the US could unilaterally dictate it's whims to a fractured Europe. The EU has already surpassed the US in size and economic power, and the odds are very good that trend will continue.
They sued MS for infringing on Java, won $20 million and then sued again which ended with a settlement out of court for $2 billion.
Are you referring to the famous suit where Sun sued Microsoft for violating the very clear licensing terms for Java because they created a similar-but-not-quite-compatible implementation of Java, thus diluting the Java brand and threatening to fracture the market?
If so, how on earth is that even *remotely* similar to patent trolling?
For sure, it is nothing compared to the rest of the crap being downloaded, but still!
But that's the whole point. As percentage of content, those headers are tiny. The *real* problem is that a gazillion HTTP requests are being made in order to pull a whole bunch of superfluous content.
Err... so? He could be the biggest asshole in the world for all I care, so long as he does a good job and injects some accountability and transparency into the process.
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, it's that the anger seems to be directed purely at Jews who circumcise infants,
Bullshit. The article is about Israel, so naturally judaism is the subject, here, but the anger is directed at the practice of circumcision, a practice that happens to be rooted in judeo-christian beliefs. So yes, it's anger directed at Jews, *because* they practice circumcision. I'm sure if you were to ask the OP, he'd express the same anger toward *anyone* who promoted the forced excision of healthy tissue from individuals unable to give their consent.
Secondly, the argument against 'mutilation' is that this is a relatively common and routine procedure.
That's not an argument against defining it as mutilation. That's simply an argument for normalizing it. Or are you saying that any practice accepted by a culture, no matter how abhorrent, can't be described as "mutilation"?
Labial 'circumcision' is not (to my knowledge) performed as a routine procedure.
It is in some African cultures. Why do you think there was such an uproar over the issue?
Still, mutilation may be a bit of a strong word.
No, it's really not.
According to your argument, African cultures that practice female genital mutilation are perfectly right to do so, as it's "tradition". Of course, that view is utterly absurd. What we're talking about, here, is the excision of healthy tissue from the human body for absolutely no justifiable reason. Which wouldn't be so bad if the procedure were only performed on consenting adults, but the procedure is primarily performed on infants.
I have family members that were circumcised in their pre-teen years due to repeated infections
If you can't see the difference between a surgical procedure performed for valid medical reasons, and one performed simply because of tradition, there's no hope for you.
That's the real problem here. Other religions may inspire some fanatics, but Scientology is run by fanatics.
Funny, I would've characterized it as an organization run by savvy business people who don't want the Church's revenue stream interrupted, and realize that stirring up fanaticism among the middle ranks, who then keep the lower ranked folks in line, is the best way to protect their profit margin.
Worse, your post falsifies his thesis, demonstrating that Slashdot is, in fact, home to a greater number of assholes...
For the record, I happen to agree with you that cults and religions are clearly not equivalent. But I wonder... you said this:
Never mind that the cult copyrights its secret texts and demands money for them, while religions' holy literature is freely available. Never mind that the cult breaks the law willy-nilly.
So, what about the Catholic church back in the days when the bible wasn't available to the masses, and sins could be expunged with an appropriately sized donation to the local diocese?
If you think you can understand reality you are deluded.
And therefore inventing an imaginary sky faery out of whole cloth is completely rational!
No. No, wait, that's just completely fucking insane.
Because you can't just, you know... put the coin in a different pocket?
1) Postgres is C and not C++. I find that I can write code in C++ nowadays much faster then I can in C (and it comes out just as fast, the C++ "is slow" is an archaic view).
Buh? Since when has anybody said that? Ugly, yes. Byzantine, yes. Convoluted, hell yes. But slow? No, of course not.
Exactly! For example, here in Canada, it's impossible to buy food that's bad for you! All they sell at the grocery stores is vegetables and low-fat yogurt! No really, it's true, I swear!
Unless people go back to using lard
Right, that's the idea... go back to lard. You get better results, and it's better for you. I'd be amazed if higher-end restaurants weren't already doing just that.
Uhuh... and yet, you still haven't explained why epub is an "awful thing". PDF is an absolutely *horrible* ebook format, save for *very* specific types of documents (technical literature, in particular, where fixed layout is very important).
Yeah, epub... that horrible free, open ebook standard. How horrible. oO
I must be missing a joke, here... what does "House of Leaves" have to do with "Leaves of Grass", exactly?
Let me introduce you to three words: Local privilege exploit.
And by the way, Mr. Jobs fellater, someone who suggests the possibility that a virus could infect an iPhone isn't an "apple-hater". It's called being "realistic".
Aight, so how 'bout we just rip apart, say, "Leaves of Grass" and publish each piece individually?
Yes, because none of those apps could possibly have a bug that would allow malicious code to be installed...
Why is the Wii controller even mentioned in this freakin' story? The kid shot themselves with a loaded gun left laying around by the parent.
Because a kid getting shot by a loaded gun left lying around isn't really news. However, a kid getting shot by a loaded gun they thought was a Wii controller? Well that puts a whole new spin on an otherwise fairly mundane story that's been played out time and time again.
Legally, no. But morally? Well, I beg to differ: those companies generate millions of dollars a year and would be in a completely different situation right now if they didn't have OpenSSH to benefit from.
Uh, so what? Those developers *chose* to release their code under a license which creates absolutely no obligation on the part of the user. They made that choice because they feel that open, free code is a good thing. So if their users don't give them any cash, why should they be surprised or offended? Meanwhile, why should those users feel any obligation whatsoever? The developers make the choice to donate their time. If the project isn't financially viable, that's hardly their problem.
By your logic, I should expect local pet owners to give me a little cash because I volunteer at the local humane society. Of course, that's ridiculous, because I choose to donate my time without any expectation of a financial quid pro quo. The openssh developers are no different.
In the 10 years since the inception of the OpenSSH project, these companies have contributed not even a dime of thanks in support of the OpenSSH project (despite numerous requests).
And they don't have to, either morally or legally.
OpenSSH is released under the BSD license, and the devs know full well that they may not be financially rewarded for their work. To suddenly expect those users to donate cash just because they use the very code you freed is, to say, the least, hypocritical. After all, if you wanted to be paid for the work you do, why are you releasing it for free to the world under one of the most liberal software licenses possible? Why not a dual license that requires payment for commercial use? Naturally because the BSDs are all about freedom, of course.
Well, unless they think they're getting screwed financially.
Do you really believe that anything the EU does is going to prevent the US from rather forcibly letting the world know that the IP manuactured in the US isn't going to be passed around for free? Dream on. You are talking about a huge economy that is responsible for the well-being of nearly a half a billion people.
Yeah:
GDP (Nominal):
EU - US $14.51 trillion (2009 est.)
US - US $14.266 trillion (2009)
Population:
EU - 491,582,852 (July 2009 est.)
US - 307,212,123 (July 2009 est.)
Sorry buddy, the days are over when the US could unilaterally dictate it's whims to a fractured Europe. The EU has already surpassed the US in size and economic power, and the odds are very good that trend will continue.
Unfortunately the process is basically that the EC offers something slightly less unreasonable each round
Yeah, welcome to governing by consensus. There is no government in the world that doesn't work that way.
They sued MS for infringing on Java, won $20 million and then sued again which ended with a settlement out of court for $2 billion.
Are you referring to the famous suit where Sun sued Microsoft for violating the very clear licensing terms for Java because they created a similar-but-not-quite-compatible implementation of Java, thus diluting the Java brand and threatening to fracture the market?
If so, how on earth is that even *remotely* similar to patent trolling?
For sure, it is nothing compared to the rest of the crap being downloaded, but still!
But that's the whole point. As percentage of content, those headers are tiny. The *real* problem is that a gazillion HTTP requests are being made in order to pull a whole bunch of superfluous content.
OH NO! Not 512 whole *bytes*! Dear god, what will we do?!? Think of the fraction of a percentage of bandwidth being wasted!
Err... so? He could be the biggest asshole in the world for all I care, so long as he does a good job and injects some accountability and transparency into the process.