I'm sure he will. Why, if we ban the use of explosives, he won't use those either. And if we ban handguns there will be no murder.
Worried about carton knives on airplanes? Just ban them!
Oh, if only all of life's problems were this easy to solve.
Re:What can be done about terrorism?
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 2
Polytheistic religions aren't must better in terms of violence: Romans, Greeks, Vikings, Mongols, etc.
Re:What can be done about terrorism?
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Cool! Quoting phrases out of context from an anti-islam site! Let me join in!
On veils:
that they should draw their veils over their bosoms, Surah 24:31. Note that the complete passage here says nothing about veils over the face, but does forbid dressing in a deliberately provocative manner. The previous verse also admonishes *men* to guard their modesty as well. I can find no references to veils needing to be worn over the face.
On murder:
nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily Allah hath been to you Most Merciful! If any do that in rancour and injustice, soon shall We cast them into the fire: and easy it is for Allah., Surah 4:29-30.
On foreigners:
Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the way-farer (ye meet) and what your right hands possess: for Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious., Surah 4:36
And about your quotes: Immediately AFTER your first quote is written:
But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is the One that Heareth and Knoweth (all things)., Surah 8:61.
From context, your second quote clearly refers to those who have broken oaths: Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths and initiated the aggression, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe!, Surah 9:11
As for Islamic women, I lived next door to one that went out in public daily with normal everyday American clothing, and used a bikini when at the beach. Perhaps you are confusing religion with culture, because she was not arab or Persian, but Turkish.
Don't get me wrong, I am not Islamic, and I have extreme opposition to it on theological grounds. But as a moral code it ranks among the best. One big problem with Islam, and which tends to cause extremism in some cases, is the deliberate joining of spiritual and secular authority. In other words, they do not believe in the separation of church and state.
Re:Islam logged off from the Koran long ago
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 2
You used the word "regime". I can think of no single leader of ANY regime, regardless of religion, that will meet your criteria.
Re:What can be done about terrorism?
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
During the crusades the Islamic communities of Asia Minor and the Middle East supported and harbored Jewish and Christians from the barbarian Europeans.
For thirteen hundred years the Islamic faith has been one of peace, civilization and high culture. The Quran condemns the killing of the innocent. It condemns suicide in any form. It condemns the degredation of women.
Every faith has its extremist bigots who use religion as nothing more than an excuse for their acts of evil.
How to boil a live frog without him jumping out of the pot:
1) Put frog into pot with cold water. Make him comfortable.
2) Very, very, very slowly, turn up the heat.
This lesson, and accompaning experiment, is taught in PolySci 101 at all reputable Ivy League schools. Buddng politicians quickly learn that if you dump frog/public into boiling water, they will immediately jump out and loudly complain. But if you use the above method, the frog/public will not realize you are killing him, and will continue to vote for you.
Okay, what did this have to do with a clean desktop? Well, their productivity is slowly being damaged and they don't know it, so they keep at it until they're poached and unable to think any other way.
You have to catch the computer uers when they're young, and teach them that pots of cold water are deadly.
I'm thinking about it, but it's hard. You're a fireman. You're in the building helping people get out. You know you're going to die. But you stay and help people get out.
These men and women are sitting with God today.
Re:Remain rational for months - no witchhunts
on
Our New Pearl Harbor
·
· Score: 2
It's also the way of the rest of the world. Remember where Salem learned its trade from, who sold the slaves to us, and why there's no comparison between Manzanar and Nanking.
There's thousands of Windows-only software titles down at the local CompUSA, Fry's and Micro Centers. If they aren't ported to Linux, then what makes you think MS2 Office would be?
How come, despite the supposed love affair with Linux that IBM has, Lotus SmartSuite has not been ported to Linux yet?
Maybe I spelled it wrong. You know, the guy that got exiled on Narayan for twenty years. The mad soliquist of every viewscreen in four of the six worlds in Exile.
I can't believe that people are upset over this. Wake up, smell the coffee, and welcome to the real world. Please notice that this reality does not precisely follow your expectations. Part of growing up is learning to deal with it.
If you stand up, walk to the corner, enter a liquor store, and buy a pack of condoms, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO KNOW ABOUT IT! Do you expect the clerk to wear blindfolds so he doesn't know who he is selling to?
It is perfectly reasonable, and expected by most people, that their actions which interact with other people will not be private. You call your mother on the phone and you mother will know about it. Duh! You talk to your mother in a crowded room and lots of people will know about it. You shout to your mother from across Grand Central Station, and hundreds of people will know about it.
That is why the law has a certain thing known as "reasonable expectation of privacy". The information about your website is already collected and available to the website. Go peruse your own apache logs if you don't believe me. They know what files you visited and in what order. Do you really expect them, if they are in the business of marketing a product, not to corrolate that information? They would be stupid if they did not.
You cannot expect that you will live life in a vacumn. You cannot expect that online businesses will behave differently than brick-and-mortor businesses. You cannot expect that one party in a transaction will forget all details about it after it concludes.
There were actually seven endings. Or at least seven ending sequences, with two of them having the same final image.
1) Free Saavedro, return with book.
2) Free Saavedro, return without book.
3) Imprison Saavedro, return with book.
4) Imprison Saavedro, return without book.
4) Imprison Saavedro, then let him go, he kills you.
5) Join Saavedro on balcony, he kills you.
Well, if you don't make any mistakes in the Myst games, there is no physical violence (other than an occasional imprisonment). But if you make a mistake, watch out!
In Riven you can get shot dead. In Exile you get your brains bashed in.
I just finished playing Exile a few days ago. I made a mistake. I trusted the poor guy. Then he rushes up and bashes my brains in with a stone axe. The rest of the game was quite peaceful, mellow, psychodelic, etc, so when this happened it was quite a shock. Very violent in the context of the game.
My problem is the opposite. I want to use the existing standards as much as possible. But I am aware that not every system has them implemented. And even if new systems fully implement them, there's a lot of older versions installed out there that don't.
I don't have the resources to support every Unix system out there. No way, no how. So I want to use the standards. But it will mean saying "no" to a lot of people.
instead you could just copy-n-paste your conversion code from version 2 followed by the code from version 3
That's what I did in my application (which kaim/kinkatta borrowed from, serendipitously enough). When I first wrote it, it was at a furious pace and I put in a quick-n-dirty file format. Then when Qt got XML support, it only made sense to use that instead. So I change the file formats over, but kept the old way around. It now converts automatically from the old to the new (which a info message to the user that it is doing so). It has caused a bit of code bloat, but by the time I reach version 1.0, it will have been long enough to be safe to drop the old way.
That episode was what got me started in the first place pondering backwards compatibility, and it eventually led me to post this topic's question.
Or you could use a data format that's a bit more extensible, this seems to be the real problem.
By using XML, I expect full extensibility. But I can forsee one problem kinkatta may run into (if they haven't already). Using XML is great, awesome, and the Right Thing(tm). But KDE still uses a group/name/value ascii format for its settings files. Is it better to go against the KDE flow by using XML, or use the existing KDE API for settings? Hopefully KDE will switch to XML for its setting in 3.0.
Your analogy only makes sense if you first assume that closed source software is violent. It is not. Users of closed source software aquire and use it voluntarily.
A better analogy is "fighting fire with fire", since fire is not evil, and is a useful tool. But the way the FSF continually condemns and villifies copyright, I continually wonder why RMS chooses to consort with that evil demon. If copright is wrong, then so is the GPL. If owning software is wrong, then so is placing it under the GPL. Instead, the FSF should concentrate on portraying copyright and software ownership as useful but frequently misused tools.
Good analogy, but it's off ever so slightly. Perhaps it's just semantics. But I would say that the public domain is the "gift", BSD is the "sharing" and the GPL is like a "loan".
You certainly can share something with strings attached, but it isn't that common. When you eat candy in kindergarten, the teacher does not say "did you bring enough to give to everyone", instead she says "did you bring enough to share with everyone."
With your busybox (and excellent package, by the way), you have loaned the use of it out, and you have indicated that you have received back considerable interest.
Yeah, sort of like Rush Limbaugh using a Pretender's song as his theme, so that more people associate it with him instead of the authors. (ps. I adore that pompous old windbag).
According to Limbaugh, when criticized by a band member for using the song, "then why did they sell the rights to it?"
If the Pretenders had used the OAL, nothing would have changed, except that they would never be reimbursed everytime a Rush played that song to promote himself.
Actually, it's about freedom and being able to do whatever you want with the code.
Amen! I didn't start using the BSD license until the words of RMS started sinking in...
"Software should not be owned". If I am not supposed to own my original work, then I am supposed to own derivative works even LESS. Yet the majority of restrictions in the GPL apply to derivative works.
"If your friend asks to make a copy, it would be wrong to refuse." Well, what if I created a private derivative of a GPLd program that dynamically links to a non-GPL library, and my friends asks for a copy? I cannot do it without violating the GPL.
"And above all society needs to encourage the spirit of voluntary cooperation in its citizens." 'Voluntary' is not about telling people what to do. But the GPL is very explicit in telling people how they may distribute the software. The GPL is basically saying 'here are the rules for volunteering.' Strange.
The GPL is certainly appropriate for some projects (just as the OAL is appropriate from some music). I have not ruled it off of my list of licenses to consider when I start a new project. However I have yet to run across the need to restrict my users in regards to my software.
He didn't bash the GPL. He only mentioned that the linkable parts of the OS would probably be relicensed. And he specifically mentioned GNU's LGPL. What he did bash were the mindless GPL zealots hitting people over the head with words that RMS never uttered.
He didn't bash Linux. He only stated that he had different goals than Linus, and desired a different way of doing things. Not preferring something does not equate to bashing.
And he didn't bash RMS. Someone made a lame joke about bearded weirdos and he replied that bearded weirdos would probably make him sad. It's a joke. Laugh or groan, your choice. But don't take it as RMS bashing.
I think you're starting to take some of this stuff too seriously. You're in danger of making GNU your religion and RMS your prophet. Lighten up and learn to laugh and realize not everyone is going to be your clone. Even RMS doesn't take himself seriously at times. Why else would he wear silly saint outfits and sing lame ditties about software...
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure he will. Why, if we ban the use of explosives, he won't use those either. And if we ban handguns there will be no murder.
Worried about carton knives on airplanes? Just ban them!
Oh, if only all of life's problems were this easy to solve.
Polytheistic religions aren't must better in terms of violence: Romans, Greeks, Vikings, Mongols, etc.
Cool! Quoting phrases out of context from an anti-islam site! Let me join in!
On veils:
that they should draw their veils over their bosoms, Surah 24:31. Note that the complete passage here says nothing about veils over the face, but does forbid dressing in a deliberately provocative manner. The previous verse also admonishes *men* to guard their modesty as well. I can find no references to veils needing to be worn over the face.
On murder:
nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily Allah hath been to you Most Merciful! If any do that in rancour and injustice, soon shall We cast them into the fire: and easy it is for Allah., Surah 4:29-30.
On foreigners:
Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the way-farer (ye meet) and what your right hands possess: for Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious., Surah 4:36
And about your quotes: Immediately AFTER your first quote is written:
But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is the One that Heareth and Knoweth (all things)., Surah 8:61.
From context, your second quote clearly refers to those who have broken oaths: Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths and initiated the aggression, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe!, Surah 9:11
As for Islamic women, I lived next door to one that went out in public daily with normal everyday American clothing, and used a bikini when at the beach. Perhaps you are confusing religion with culture, because she was not arab or Persian, but Turkish.
Don't get me wrong, I am not Islamic, and I have extreme opposition to it on theological grounds. But as a moral code it ranks among the best. One big problem with Islam, and which tends to cause extremism in some cases, is the deliberate joining of spiritual and secular authority. In other words, they do not believe in the separation of church and state.
You used the word "regime". I can think of no single leader of ANY regime, regardless of religion, that will meet your criteria.
During the crusades the Islamic communities of Asia Minor and the Middle East supported and harbored Jewish and Christians from the barbarian Europeans.
For thirteen hundred years the Islamic faith has been one of peace, civilization and high culture. The Quran condemns the killing of the innocent. It condemns suicide in any form. It condemns the degredation of women.
Every faith has its extremist bigots who use religion as nothing more than an excuse for their acts of evil.
How to boil a live frog without him jumping out of the pot:
1) Put frog into pot with cold water. Make him comfortable.
2) Very, very, very slowly, turn up the heat.
This lesson, and accompaning experiment, is taught in PolySci 101 at all reputable Ivy League schools. Buddng politicians quickly learn that if you dump frog/public into boiling water, they will immediately jump out and loudly complain. But if you use the above method, the frog/public will not realize you are killing him, and will continue to vote for you.
Okay, what did this have to do with a clean desktop? Well, their productivity is slowly being damaged and they don't know it, so they keep at it until they're poached and unable to think any other way.
You have to catch the computer uers when they're young, and teach them that pots of cold water are deadly.
So when they blow up something bigger and kill more people, we will go back into work and have business as usual again. And again. And again.
If we lock down this nation in a web liberty killing security measures, then the enemy will have won.
I'm thinking about it, but it's hard. You're a fireman. You're in the building helping people get out. You know you're going to die. But you stay and help people get out.
These men and women are sitting with God today.
It's also the way of the rest of the world. Remember where Salem learned its trade from, who sold the slaves to us, and why there's no comparison between Manzanar and Nanking.
There's thousands of Windows-only software titles down at the local CompUSA, Fry's and Micro Centers. If they aren't ported to Linux, then what makes you think MS2 Office would be?
How come, despite the supposed love affair with Linux that IBM has, Lotus SmartSuite has not been ported to Linux yet?
Everyone is coming down on the feds for not pursuing a breakup. Why?
What possible good would it do anyone out there if Microsoft were broken up onto two Baby Bill's?
Do you really think MicrosoftOne will stop offering deals for exclusive contracts just because they can't through Office into the package?
Do you really think MicrosoftTwo will open up the Office File formats just because they don't work down the hall from the OS guys anymore?
Maybe I spelled it wrong. You know, the guy that got exiled on Narayan for twenty years. The mad soliquist of every viewscreen in four of the six worlds in Exile.
You know, Brad Dourif!
Geez.
This seems to rate right up there with speech recognition as one of those technologies whose advent has been only 5 years away for the past 15 years.
Speech recognition is here. It works. It works very well. And it doesn't take a ton of resources.
But no one wants it! Except for a few specialty uses, people simply do not want to talk to their computer. It's embarassing.
I can't believe that people are upset over this. Wake up, smell the coffee, and welcome to the real world. Please notice that this reality does not precisely follow your expectations. Part of growing up is learning to deal with it.
If you stand up, walk to the corner, enter a liquor store, and buy a pack of condoms, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO KNOW ABOUT IT! Do you expect the clerk to wear blindfolds so he doesn't know who he is selling to?
It is perfectly reasonable, and expected by most people, that their actions which interact with other people will not be private. You call your mother on the phone and you mother will know about it. Duh! You talk to your mother in a crowded room and lots of people will know about it. You shout to your mother from across Grand Central Station, and hundreds of people will know about it.
That is why the law has a certain thing known as "reasonable expectation of privacy". The information about your website is already collected and available to the website. Go peruse your own apache logs if you don't believe me. They know what files you visited and in what order. Do you really expect them, if they are in the business of marketing a product, not to corrolate that information? They would be stupid if they did not.
You cannot expect that you will live life in a vacumn. You cannot expect that online businesses will behave differently than brick-and-mortor businesses. You cannot expect that one party in a transaction will forget all details about it after it concludes.
There were actually seven endings. Or at least seven ending sequences, with two of them having the same final image.
1) Free Saavedro, return with book.
2) Free Saavedro, return without book.
3) Imprison Saavedro, return with book.
4) Imprison Saavedro, return without book.
4) Imprison Saavedro, then let him go, he kills you.
5) Join Saavedro on balcony, he kills you.
Well, if you don't make any mistakes in the Myst games, there is no physical violence (other than an occasional imprisonment). But if you make a mistake, watch out!
In Riven you can get shot dead. In Exile you get your brains bashed in.
I just finished playing Exile a few days ago. I made a mistake. I trusted the poor guy. Then he rushes up and bashes my brains in with a stone axe. The rest of the game was quite peaceful, mellow, psychodelic, etc, so when this happened it was quite a shock. Very violent in the context of the game.
My problem is the opposite. I want to use the existing standards as much as possible. But I am aware that not every system has them implemented. And even if new systems fully implement them, there's a lot of older versions installed out there that don't.
I don't have the resources to support every Unix system out there. No way, no how. So I want to use the standards. But it will mean saying "no" to a lot of people.
instead you could just copy-n-paste your conversion code from version 2 followed by the code from version 3
That's what I did in my application (which kaim/kinkatta borrowed from, serendipitously enough). When I first wrote it, it was at a furious pace and I put in a quick-n-dirty file format. Then when Qt got XML support, it only made sense to use that instead. So I change the file formats over, but kept the old way around. It now converts automatically from the old to the new (which a info message to the user that it is doing so). It has caused a bit of code bloat, but by the time I reach version 1.0, it will have been long enough to be safe to drop the old way.
That episode was what got me started in the first place pondering backwards compatibility, and it eventually led me to post this topic's question.
Or you could use a data format that's a bit more extensible, this seems to be the real problem.
By using XML, I expect full extensibility. But I can forsee one problem kinkatta may run into (if they haven't already). Using XML is great, awesome, and the Right Thing(tm). But KDE still uses a group/name/value ascii format for its settings files. Is it better to go against the KDE flow by using XML, or use the existing KDE API for settings? Hopefully KDE will switch to XML for its setting in 3.0.
Your analogy only makes sense if you first assume that closed source software is violent. It is not. Users of closed source software aquire and use it voluntarily.
A better analogy is "fighting fire with fire", since fire is not evil, and is a useful tool. But the way the FSF continually condemns and villifies copyright, I continually wonder why RMS chooses to consort with that evil demon. If copright is wrong, then so is the GPL. If owning software is wrong, then so is placing it under the GPL. Instead, the FSF should concentrate on portraying copyright and software ownership as useful but frequently misused tools.
GPL is about sharing ... BSD licensing is a gift
Good analogy, but it's off ever so slightly. Perhaps it's just semantics. But I would say that the public domain is the "gift", BSD is the "sharing" and the GPL is like a "loan".
You certainly can share something with strings attached, but it isn't that common. When you eat candy in kindergarten, the teacher does not say "did you bring enough to give to everyone", instead she says "did you bring enough to share with everyone."
With your busybox (and excellent package, by the way), you have loaned the use of it out, and you have indicated that you have received back considerable interest.
I didn't call X11 a "toolkit", I called it a system.
Yeah, sort of like Rush Limbaugh using a Pretender's song as his theme, so that more people associate it with him instead of the authors. (ps. I adore that pompous old windbag).
According to Limbaugh, when criticized by a band member for using the song, "then why did they sell the rights to it?"
If the Pretenders had used the OAL, nothing would have changed, except that they would never be reimbursed everytime a Rush played that song to promote himself.
Brett is BSD license Zealot numero uno. He's the balancing force against RMS so that the universe doesn't implode.
Just as a lot of folks in the Linux/GNU community wish RMS would tone it down a bit, a lot in the BSD community wish Brett would stick with coding.
Amen! I didn't start using the BSD license until the words of RMS started sinking in...
"Software should not be owned". If I am not supposed to own my original work, then I am supposed to own derivative works even LESS. Yet the majority of restrictions in the GPL apply to derivative works.
"If your friend asks to make a copy, it would be wrong to refuse." Well, what if I created a private derivative of a GPLd program that dynamically links to a non-GPL library, and my friends asks for a copy? I cannot do it without violating the GPL.
"And above all society needs to encourage the spirit of voluntary cooperation in its citizens." 'Voluntary' is not about telling people what to do. But the GPL is very explicit in telling people how they may distribute the software. The GPL is basically saying 'here are the rules for volunteering.' Strange.
The GPL is certainly appropriate for some projects (just as the OAL is appropriate from some music). I have not ruled it off of my list of licenses to consider when I start a new project. However I have yet to run across the need to restrict my users in regards to my software.
He didn't bash the GPL. He only mentioned that the linkable parts of the OS would probably be relicensed. And he specifically mentioned GNU's LGPL. What he did bash were the mindless GPL zealots hitting people over the head with words that RMS never uttered.
He didn't bash Linux. He only stated that he had different goals than Linus, and desired a different way of doing things. Not preferring something does not equate to bashing.
And he didn't bash RMS. Someone made a lame joke about bearded weirdos and he replied that bearded weirdos would probably make him sad. It's a joke. Laugh or groan, your choice. But don't take it as RMS bashing.
I think you're starting to take some of this stuff too seriously. You're in danger of making GNU your religion and RMS your prophet. Lighten up and learn to laugh and realize not everyone is going to be your clone. Even RMS doesn't take himself seriously at times. Why else would he wear silly saint outfits and sing lame ditties about software...