My opinion is that people who want to keep the market-liberalistic system (or, so-called capitalism) and keep on downloading illegal MP3s are hypocritical. If downloading MP3s should be legal, we must take the consequence and abolish the system of getting paid as much as the market wants to.
There is no logic in allowing free distribution of MP3s unless we overthrow the capitalistic system and create the socialistic world. In this world, the musicians would be paid by the State and music would be freely available to the masses. Therefore, I take the popularity of MP3s as the first sign of a revolution.
Or maybe not. Maybe downloading MP3s is just another selfish act, not an actual protest against the unfair system.
By the way, if you call yourself liberalistic, you should not slam this comment as "socialistic propaganda". Freedom of Speech does also mean that people have enough respect to listen.
This is actually the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a long, long time.
The Governor-General and the Chairman of the BBC have strong links with the Labour Party, and surprise surprise, the BBC supports the Labour Government in virtually everything they do, and virtually everything they say.
If you had actually followed the BBC, you would have known what kind of coverage they do of the labour party. And, surprise surprise, it does not differ from the others.
This would include old-fashioned Marxist anti-colonialism. ...which is completely illogical in your stream of conspiracies - Labour in the UK is a modern half market-liberalistic social democratic party. Very far from Marxism. They even changed colour (from red to dark purple). Labour is not a socialistic party - and very not a Marxistic party.
They are very good at highlighting and exagerrating news which fits their agenda, while suppressing news which doesn't.
Unlike Slashdot, who provides all the different reports and stories which show the superiority of Microsoft products.
I suspect that many in Zimbabwe would be very pleased for the UK/US to send the soldiers in, simply to sort out the criminals they have in government now.
I think I'd rather listen to BBC than what you suspect. I don't know about the rest of the world.
Please people, can we be a little more objective and a little less emotionally-charged? I am not saying that this article is a complete lie (far from it, I can easily imagine AOL doing something like this), but let's look at both sides of the story before coming to a decision.
Obviously, you are slightly hypocritical here. Can't say your rant looks like you have considered both sides of BBCs alleged political agenda.
I'm not necessarily saying that I totally disagree with all your opinions. I'm just saying they are presented in a reactionary and completely black/white way.
Everyone sitting patiently waiting for a new joke to appear on slashdot, silently lurking in the shadows to be the very first person to comment on how stupid April Fool's Day on/. is:
You are the ones getting fooled! You are probably the most brain-dead creatures ever in existence; sitting around on a site you claim to be stupid and annoying!
I agree with many of the points pointed out by the writer of this article. But there are a few points he seems to overlook or does not want to be very accurate at.
He mentions that a globalist economy could be the only way to save the world from poverty and environmental problems.
I can not agree. A globalist economy is not an economy made for the entire world, it is an economy based on controlling the entire world. The corporations (and some national states (don't wanna mention any...)) have understood this and covers their hunger for profit behind a shell: "we just want to make the world one again, remove borders and so on."
I agree that if we're going to remove poverty and really do something about environmental issues, we need to think globally. Each nation cannot, any longer, be held responsible for its poverty or environmental problems.
But letting the corporations, the IMF, the WTO, the World Bank and the richest nations control this development is actually a step towards the exact opposite than those goals. This will lead to even greater poverty - and uncontrollable destruction of nature.
If the companies get more power, wages will decrease, not increase. If the companies get more power, they will cut more trees today
(money today is more worth than money tomorrow).
Companies are made simply to earn money, not to take care of any poor people or Mother Nature. Remember that. We, the people of the world, must take control of its development. We cannot leave it to the politicians, the governments or the companies.
"nForce supports a robust new feature set designed specificallyfor the new capabilities of Windows XP, including: digital music, DVD playback, 3D graphics, Dolby Digital 5.1 audio, networking, and more. The pairing of nForce and Windows XP is a perfect match--the world's best platform processor powering the world's most advanced operating system."
I don't know about other people, but those kind of statements do not exactly encourage me to buy. Actually, I decided to buy something else instead. A cake, for throwing.
There is no easy answer to this question. There is no truth. That is frustrating to many people, because in our normal world products can be compared on a relatively stable quality divided by price scale. However, when the price is 0, this division fails.
The reason is that there is no connection between price (or company stock value or whatever) and quality in the Linux world. Mostly because quality is such a weird word in this context.
Me, I know Linux. I started off with Red Hat, then turned my ugly head towards Debian, then Trustix, then got a sniff of Mandrake, upgraded Mandrake, got tired and downloaded Slackware, then tried SuSE. At this time I had learned so much that people started asking me how to install and use Linux.
What kind of advice I gave? Well. Different advice to different people. For a while, software base * stability became my key. For instance, a (newbie) friend of mine wanted to play games and write kword letters. The hazzle of installing X 4 and koffice on a stable RH 6.2 through a 64K ISDN internet link made me reconsider and install Mandrake 7 instead - which had pre-installed X4, koffice and tuxracer.
On the other hand, when my school asked me what Linux to use for their web server, I told them to use a stable one, with a minimum of gadgets but lots of easy administration and installation tools They picked RH 7.0 (not my fault, I would have chosen RH6.2!).
The answer to your question is:
If you want to learn everything about Linux, try everything you have the time to try. Find out how those distros organize files, directories and startup scripts. Reinstall. Try features.
If you just want to generally learn how to cope with Linux, pick any distro. Learn how to use that distro. Don't care about the rest. If you're interested, it will come to you anyway sooner or later.
Nah, Microsoft hasn't embraced. Microsoft tweaks other standards until they fit. Just look at JavaScript/JScript, BASIC/QBasic, HTML/IE's rendering, RTF/MS-RTF... The list is long. Ximian, helped by MS, won't make extensions and make "better" standards.
And that's fine. Standards are good. But not when they're solely designed to make money for the creators of the standard. What would f.ex. happen if the HTML standard said that you had to include a file from w3c, and that cost a little every time.
Clearly, Microsoft would not help Ximian if Microsoft didn't think they would earn money on helping them.
As long as the Open Source community just ports & replies whatever the Closed Source Companies do, Open Source never gains an advantage. Why use Ximian MONO, when Microsoft.NET is the original? When Microsoft always will be first with updates, because they set the standard? I am afraid that the OS community will grow into a broiler farm for future MS.NET Closed Source developers. --
Microsoft Visual InterDev Home Page
Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a01b6'. Object doesn't support this property
or method: 'platform'./vstudio/includes/header.inc, line 76.
Uhm I wouldn't place my servers in Angola - considering the power trouble they're having there;)
Actually I think it would be really good if these countries got a better infrastructure when it comes to internet; after all we've taken everything from them already, so now it's time for them to exploit us a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no logic in allowing free distribution of MP3s unless we overthrow the capitalistic system and create the socialistic world. In this world, the musicians would be paid by the State and music would be freely available to the masses. Therefore, I take the popularity of MP3s as the first sign of a revolution.
Or maybe not. Maybe downloading MP3s is just another selfish act, not an actual protest against the unfair system.
By the way, if you call yourself liberalistic, you should not slam this comment as "socialistic propaganda". Freedom of Speech does also mean that people have enough respect to listen.
The Governor-General and the Chairman of the BBC have strong links with the Labour Party, and surprise surprise, the BBC supports the Labour Government in virtually everything they do, and virtually everything they say.
If you had actually followed the BBC, you would have known what kind of coverage they do of the labour party. And, surprise surprise, it does not differ from the others.
This would include old-fashioned Marxist anti-colonialism.
...which is completely illogical in your stream of conspiracies - Labour in the UK is a modern half market-liberalistic social democratic party. Very far from Marxism. They even changed colour (from red to dark purple). Labour is not a socialistic party - and very not a Marxistic party.
They are very good at highlighting and exagerrating news which fits their agenda, while suppressing news which doesn't.
Unlike Slashdot, who provides all the different reports and stories which show the superiority of Microsoft products.
I suspect that many in Zimbabwe would be very pleased for the UK/US to send the soldiers in, simply to sort out the criminals they have in government now.
I think I'd rather listen to BBC than what you suspect. I don't know about the rest of the world.
Please people, can we be a little more objective and a little less emotionally-charged? I am not saying that this article is a complete lie (far from it, I can easily imagine AOL doing something like this), but let's look at both sides of the story before coming to a decision.
Obviously, you are slightly hypocritical here. Can't say your rant looks like you have considered both sides of BBCs alleged political agenda.
I'm not necessarily saying that I totally disagree with all your opinions. I'm just saying they are presented in a reactionary and completely black/white way.
I was not aware that all the countries in Africa have joined and become one country! Wow! This is huge!
You are the ones getting fooled! You are probably the most brain-dead creatures ever in existence; sitting around on a site you claim to be stupid and annoying!
And congrats to the TacoMan: it actually works :)
PHP: PHP Heats Pussies is a programming language which actually makes you able to integrate sex into almost any other boring task.
It does, however, make you exceptionally quick and you do also connect very well with a huge number of partners. In other words, be careful with PHP.
He mentions that a globalist economy could be the only way to save the world from poverty and environmental problems.
I can not agree. A globalist economy is not an economy made for the entire world, it is an economy based on controlling the entire world. The corporations (and some national states (don't wanna mention any...)) have understood this and covers their hunger for profit behind a shell: "we just want to make the world one again, remove borders and so on."
I agree that if we're going to remove poverty and really do something about environmental issues, we need to think globally. Each nation cannot, any longer, be held responsible for its poverty or environmental problems.
But letting the corporations, the IMF, the WTO, the World Bank and the richest nations control this development is actually a step towards the exact opposite than those goals. This will lead to even greater poverty - and uncontrollable destruction of nature.
If the companies get more power, wages will decrease, not increase. If the companies get more power, they will cut more trees today
(money today is more worth than money tomorrow).
Companies are made simply to earn money, not to take care of any poor people or Mother Nature. Remember that. We, the people of the world, must take control of its development. We cannot leave it to the politicians, the governments or the companies.
I don't know about other people, but those kind of statements do not exactly encourage me to buy. Actually, I decided to buy something else instead. A cake, for throwing.
The reason is that there is no connection between price (or company stock value or whatever) and quality in the Linux world. Mostly because quality is such a weird word in this context.
Me, I know Linux. I started off with Red Hat, then turned my ugly head towards Debian, then Trustix, then got a sniff of Mandrake, upgraded Mandrake, got tired and downloaded Slackware, then tried SuSE. At this time I had learned so much that people started asking me how to install and use Linux.
What kind of advice I gave? Well. Different advice to different people. For a while, software base * stability became my key. For instance, a (newbie) friend of mine wanted to play games and write kword letters. The hazzle of installing X 4 and koffice on a stable RH 6.2 through a 64K ISDN internet link made me reconsider and install Mandrake 7 instead - which had pre-installed X4, koffice and tuxracer.
On the other hand, when my school asked me what Linux to use for their web server, I told them to use a stable one, with a minimum of gadgets but lots of easy administration and installation tools They picked RH 7.0 (not my fault, I would have chosen RH6.2!).
The answer to your question is:
If you want to learn everything about Linux, try everything you have the time to try. Find out how those distros organize files, directories and startup scripts. Reinstall. Try features.
If you just want to generally learn how to cope with Linux, pick any distro. Learn how to use that distro. Don't care about the rest. If you're interested, it will come to you anyway sooner or later.
Nah, Microsoft hasn't embraced. Microsoft tweaks other standards until they fit. Just look at JavaScript/JScript, BASIC/QBasic, HTML/IE's rendering, RTF/MS-RTF... The list is long. Ximian, helped by MS, won't make extensions and make "better" standards.
And that's fine. Standards are good. But not when they're solely designed to make money for the creators of the standard. What would f.ex. happen if the HTML standard said that you had to include a file from w3c, and that cost a little every time.
--
Clearly, Microsoft would not help Ximian if Microsoft didn't think they would earn money on helping them.
As long as the Open Source community just ports & replies whatever the Closed Source Companies do, Open Source never gains an advantage. Why use Ximian MONO, when Microsoft .NET is the original? When Microsoft always will be first with updates, because they set the standard? I am afraid that the OS community will grow into a broiler farm for future MS .NET Closed Source developers.
--
Microsoft Visual InterDev Home Page Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a01b6'. Object doesn't support this property or method: 'platform'. /vstudio/includes/header.inc, line 76.
- Fire
- The Wheel
- Agriculture
- Mathematics
- Schools
- Religion
- TCP/IP
- WWW
And of course, the list goes on and on. Microsoft's strange arguments are because of this invalid.Nah more like widthless bandwidth.
Actually I think it would be really good if these countries got a better infrastructure when it comes to internet; after all we've taken everything from them already, so now it's time for them to exploit us a bit.