"It may be a less extreme form of feudalism, but it's still feudalism."
If that's true, then every nation in the past, present, and as far as I can see, the future, has been a fuedal nation. Every employer would be a manorial lord. Even you, if you hired someone, would be a tyrant.
When you redefine a word to mean everything, it will end up meaning nothing. Study what feudalism, particularly the manorial feudalism, and you'll see that it is not just a quantitative difference between it and modern employment, but they're radically divergent in every area.
The "personal and freely accepted links" refers to the nobility. A knight swears fealty to his baron who then swears to the earl, then the duke then the king. Then the king gives land and rights to the duke, who parcels it out to the earls, then the barons and finally to the knight.
On the other hand, this thread is more concerned with manorialism, the economic system that the workers had to live under. As such, it is extremely dissimilar to the modern workplace. The closest we've ever come to this in the US was the chattel slavery of the south (which was far worse than serfdom).
The typical FreeBSD user has little need for sound support. I mean, it's normally used as a development workstation or a server.
However, work IS progressing on sound support. Luigi's redoing the traditional sound driver stuff using the pcm0 device instead. The code isn't that gnarly, so why don't you check it out and write your own driver? Use the existing linux driver as a guide to how it's done for the SBLive.
(I hardly think the respect of an OS should be based on sound card support)
"It boils down to 'Will the Linux community respect OTHER peoples' licenses and property rights as fervently as they expect theirs to be respected?'."
I'm thinking that's still a wait-and-see issue. Closed source software and business in general have always gotten a bad rap from Linux users. Loki is tolerated because they share some code, but I don't know how they'll react to a company that offers binaries only for $69.
"I'm sorry, but until you provide me with proof, I refuse to believe that those arresting policemen had MPAA badges on their shoulders."
<EM?That's fine, because the badges are totally unnecessary.</EM>
Careful, you're starting to step over the line into the lunatic fringe of conspiracists.
<EM>if you've got a better idea that prevents this, let me know</EM>
Simple. And you already said it: "<EM>I think being able to use them is what matters</EM>". Take the power away from the government. Only if the government first has the power to enter your home and perform an illegal search and seizure could it possibly sell that power to Northwest Airlines. Only if it already has the power to prevent you from reverse engineering your DVDs could it ever hope to sell that power to the MPAA. Limit government to only its legitimate functions. Don't let it have so much power that it feels compelled to sell off the excess to the highest bidder.
Of course, this means we have to keep a closer eye out on the government. We can't go to sleep like we did during the fifty years or so. And we will also have to stop demanding new laws and start demanding that a lot of the old ones get repealed.
Apropos the junkie and the dealer analogy, if we keep yelling at the junkies and keep ignoring the pusher, we will never solve the problem.
"They don't need their own armies, police, courts, or jails when they're powerful enough to make governments do the dirty work for them."
So you would use the same governments bought by the corps to fight the corps with? Crazy! Sort of like summoning demons to perform an excorcism with.
"As for the tied-to-the-land thing, okay, I'll grant you that (given the admission that it's often practically different) but it's a nitpick and doesn't really change the situation."
A nitpick!?! The feudal lord WAS THE STATE! He had the power of summary EXECUTION! He threw into the gibbet any serf that QUIT! Don't give me any bullshit that your boss has anywhere near the power over you that a feudal lord would. That's just delusional.
I'm sorry, but until you provide me with proof, I refuse to believe that those arresting policemen had MPAA badges on their shoulders. Sounds more like a corrupt Norwegian government selling out to the highest bidder. Who's more evil, the junkie or the pusher?
A lot of the reason this country is as messed up as it is, is due to single-issue politics and special interest alliances.
I particularly resent your screaming at me just because I won't contribute to your cause. Interesting how you thought the use of the word FUCK in caps was supposed to convince me.
Under a feudal system, the serf was tied to the land and could not leave. However, you can leave you job anytime you want. Sure, it will be extremely inconvenient, and possibly an enormous financial burden, but you have every legal right to leave. No one came and made you employed. You had to accept the job offer by yourself.
As to the potential evil of meganationals, show me their armies, their police, their courts and their jails, and then I'll worry.
Those employees need to sue their employers for everything they can. Employers have absolutely not business even *asking* to look in someone's house.
When drug testing began, no one objected, since they didn't do drugs themselves. Then they refused to hire smokers and no one complained because they weren't smokers themselves. Now they want to base employment on your opinions. You let the camel stick its nose under the tent, and now it's all the way in.
"IMNSHO, a parent has no right to deny access to sexual information for a child of that age..."
I couldn't agree with you more. Further, it would be futile trying to deny it. However, there is a difference between allowing access to sexual information and allowing access to ANY sexual information. In particular, I'm thinking of stuff like the man-boy love, sado-masochism and other websites.
"I do not see myself as having RIGHTS with regards to her, but RESPONSIBILITIES."
No, you don't have rights, but your responsibilities imply certain obligations towards the child. Among those obligations are to provide food, clothing, and shelter. You are also obligated NOT to let him or her roam unhindered in an adult world that they are unprepared for.
To give an analogy, besides sex education, parents also need to teach their children about money, it's value, the proper ways to earn it, etc. Such an education does not consist of giving the child a thousand dollars and letting them go on a spending spree.
The poster was not asking us our opinions, as near as I could figure, but was asking us what to do in a REAL WORLD moral dilema.
It's one thing to discuss issues of "morality" such as GPL verus BSD or whether Bill Joy will go to Hell for the SCSL. It's even a good place to post calls for action, such as against DeCSS hearings. But Slashdot is not Ann Landers or Dr. Laura. That someone considers Slashdot a source of moral guidance is downright creepy.
Re:The person who gives the most re-election money
on
Politics Follows Code
·
· Score: 2
"This is why we need campaign finance reform."
A better way to do finance reform than the typical slashdot opinion of banning any company that makes more money than you (not that I'm accusing you of that), would be to allow only eligible voters to contribute. This would eliminate campaign financing by corporations, traditional PACS, unions, etc. Only individuals could contribute. Of course, freedom of association can't be done away with, to there would have to be a mechanism for individuals to voluntarily pool their funds together.
You're asking Slashdot to help you decide upon a moral course of action? For you first duty in a new job? I don't know whether to feel honored that you think so highly of us, or appalled that you consider Slashdot a fount of moral wisdom.
Ask a technical question, fine, go for it. Ask us our opinions on philosophy, morality or politics, okay. But this is hardly to place to ask for a moral advice for a real world problem.
"The MPAA can tell me what I can do in my home..."
They can tell you all they want, but they have absolutely no power to enforce their wishes on anyone. Not even if they succeed in convincing a court that DeCSS is illegal. Only the government has the power to go that. The problem isn't the MPAA. The problem is that the government has so much power that it's now hiring itself out as a bully to the highest bidder.
The problem here is that we have all become so dependant upon the teat of government, that just like little piggies, we get pissed when a bigger piggie comes along and pushes us away from the nipple we're sucking on.
"But if we're talking a 16 year old, they ought to have access to any info they need, regardless of what their parents think."
Nonsense. A 16 year old is still a minor and the responsibility of the parent. It is impossible to fulfill parental responsibilities when you are not allowed to do so by law. It's utterly arrogant to claim to know more than the parents about what a child needs.
"This is why I don't really like the BSD *AT TIMES* because it allows people to take a work, slap a restrictive license on it, and resell it in a way that the people who created the work on which it's based can't even use it freely."
If you take just five seconds to look at ftp.cdrom.com, you'll find that FreeBSD is still there! Yes it is! Nothing has been stolen. No copyrights have been subverted. No licenses altered. All the code that was free yesterday is still free today and will remain free tomorrow.
Lucent's patch to FreeBSD is just that, a patch. It is Lucent's code. FreeBSD did not write it, and has no claim over it. It doesn't matter if it's derived code or not, because it's still not FreeBSD's code!
"I suspect that Lucent didn't do a Linux "Eclipse" because Lucent doesn't buy into the GPL mindset."
You don't have to buy into any mindset to bring a product to the Linux market. However, there is a percpeption out there that you have to toe the "party line" or be miserably flamed into market submission. Despite the best efforts of Redat, SuSE, IBM, SGI, etc., there is a very vocal anti-commercial crowd in Linux. BSD does not have this, so it's only natural that Lucent sees BSD as being more business friendly.
You missed my analogy completely. I drink booze. But I don't get hangovers. Why? I don't let the booze control me. I'm in charge. There is a very big difference between a government with limited powers and no government at all.
Oh, and I don't know about your neighborhood, but in mine the garbage collection is done by a private company.
"The large corporations tend to drive the economy of the nation."
You are mistaken. Believe it or not, the small businesses (under fifty employees) holds more economic power than the large corporations. Yes, the large corporations get better press, but it's the small business owner that get's the congressman's ear.
"Why isn't everyone on Slashdot a member of the EFF?"
Oh please! Have you considered the possibility that the EFF is a political organization and that there are at least a couple hundred different political philosophies here on slashdot? How could one organization ever hope to syncronize its politics with those of slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
And if Pinkerton did that today, they would be out of business with every responsible person at Pinkerton in jail.
"It may be a less extreme form of feudalism, but it's still feudalism."
If that's true, then every nation in the past, present, and as far as I can see, the future, has been a fuedal nation. Every employer would be a manorial lord. Even you, if you hired someone, would be a tyrant.
When you redefine a word to mean everything, it will end up meaning nothing. Study what feudalism, particularly the manorial feudalism, and you'll see that it is not just a quantitative difference between it and modern employment, but they're radically divergent in every area.
The "personal and freely accepted links" refers to the nobility. A knight swears fealty to his baron who then swears to the earl, then the duke then the king. Then the king gives land and rights to the duke, who parcels it out to the earls, then the barons and finally to the knight.
On the other hand, this thread is more concerned with manorialism, the economic system that the workers had to live under. As such, it is extremely dissimilar to the modern workplace. The closest we've ever come to this in the US was the chattel slavery of the south (which was far worse than serfdom).
The typical FreeBSD user has little need for sound support. I mean, it's normally used as a development workstation or a server.
However, work IS progressing on sound support. Luigi's redoing the traditional sound driver stuff using the pcm0 device instead. The code isn't that gnarly, so why don't you check it out and write your own driver? Use the existing linux driver as a guide to how it's done for the SBLive.
(I hardly think the respect of an OS should be based on sound card support)
"It boils down to 'Will the Linux community respect OTHER peoples' licenses and property rights as fervently as they expect theirs to be respected?'."
I'm thinking that's still a wait-and-see issue. Closed source software and business in general have always gotten a bad rap from Linux users. Loki is tolerated because they share some code, but I don't know how they'll react to a company that offers binaries only for $69.
"I'm sorry, but until you provide me with proof, I refuse to believe that those arresting policemen had MPAA badges on their shoulders."
<EM?That's fine, because the badges are totally unnecessary.</EM>
Careful, you're starting to step over the line into the lunatic fringe of conspiracists.
<EM>if you've got a better idea that prevents this, let me know</EM>
Simple. And you already said it: "<EM>I think being able to use them is what matters</EM>". Take the power away from the government. Only if the government first has the power to enter your home and perform an illegal search and seizure could it possibly sell that power to Northwest Airlines. Only if it already has the power to prevent you from reverse engineering your DVDs could it ever hope to sell that power to the MPAA. Limit government to only its legitimate functions. Don't let it have so much power that it feels compelled to sell off the excess to the highest bidder.
Of course, this means we have to keep a closer eye out on the government. We can't go to sleep like we did during the fifty years or so. And we will also have to stop demanding new laws and start demanding that a lot of the old ones get repealed.
Apropos the junkie and the dealer analogy, if we keep yelling at the junkies and keep ignoring the pusher, we will never solve the problem.
"They don't need their own armies, police, courts, or jails when they're powerful enough to make governments do the dirty work for them."
So you would use the same governments bought by the corps to fight the corps with? Crazy! Sort of like summoning demons to perform an excorcism with.
"As for the tied-to-the-land thing, okay, I'll grant you that (given the admission that it's often practically different) but it's a nitpick and doesn't really change the situation."
A nitpick!?! The feudal lord WAS THE STATE! He had the power of summary EXECUTION! He threw into the gibbet any serf that QUIT! Don't give me any bullshit that your boss has anywhere near the power over you that a feudal lord would. That's just delusional.
Hey Rob! Does Larry get first night rights?
I'm sorry, but until you provide me with proof, I refuse to believe that those arresting policemen had MPAA badges on their shoulders. Sounds more like a corrupt Norwegian government selling out to the highest bidder. Who's more evil, the junkie or the pusher?
A lot of the reason this country is as messed up as it is, is due to single-issue politics and special interest alliances.
I particularly resent your screaming at me just because I won't contribute to your cause. Interesting how you thought the use of the word FUCK in caps was supposed to convince me.
"Bottom line, it is an UNJUST law for workers to not be able to organize a sickout or walkout!"
It's even more unjust for a law to require an employer not to fire an employee who fails to clock in.
Under a feudal system, the serf was tied to the land and could not leave. However, you can leave you job anytime you want. Sure, it will be extremely inconvenient, and possibly an enormous financial burden, but you have every legal right to leave. No one came and made you employed. You had to accept the job offer by yourself.
As to the potential evil of meganationals, show me their armies, their police, their courts and their jails, and then I'll worry.
Those employees need to sue their employers for everything they can. Employers have absolutely not business even *asking* to look in someone's house.
When drug testing began, no one objected, since they didn't do drugs themselves. Then they refused to hire smokers and no one complained because they weren't smokers themselves. Now they want to base employment on your opinions. You let the camel stick its nose under the tent, and now it's all the way in.
"IMNSHO, a parent has no right to deny access to sexual information for a child of that age..."
I couldn't agree with you more. Further, it would be futile trying to deny it. However, there is a difference between allowing access to sexual information and allowing access to ANY sexual information. In particular, I'm thinking of stuff like the man-boy love, sado-masochism and other websites.
"I do not see myself as having RIGHTS with regards to her, but RESPONSIBILITIES."
No, you don't have rights, but your responsibilities imply certain obligations towards the child. Among those obligations are to provide food, clothing, and shelter. You are also obligated NOT to let him or her roam unhindered in an adult world that they are unprepared for.
To give an analogy, besides sex education, parents also need to teach their children about money, it's value, the proper ways to earn it, etc. Such an education does not consist of giving the child a thousand dollars and letting them go on a spending spree.
The poster was not asking us our opinions, as near as I could figure, but was asking us what to do in a REAL WORLD moral dilema.
It's one thing to discuss issues of "morality" such as GPL verus BSD or whether Bill Joy will go to Hell for the SCSL. It's even a good place to post calls for action, such as against DeCSS hearings. But Slashdot is not Ann Landers or Dr. Laura. That someone considers Slashdot a source of moral guidance is downright creepy.
"This is why we need campaign finance reform."
A better way to do finance reform than the typical slashdot opinion of banning any company that makes more money than you (not that I'm accusing you of that), would be to allow only eligible voters to contribute. This would eliminate campaign financing by corporations, traditional PACS, unions, etc. Only individuals could contribute. Of course, freedom of association can't be done away with, to there would have to be a mechanism for individuals to voluntarily pool their funds together.
You're asking Slashdot to help you decide upon a moral course of action? For you first duty in a new job? I don't know whether to feel honored that you think so highly of us, or appalled that you consider Slashdot a fount of moral wisdom.
Ask a technical question, fine, go for it. Ask us our opinions on philosophy, morality or politics, okay. But this is hardly to place to ask for a moral advice for a real world problem.
I hardly think Norway is so backward and inept that it would surrender it's own sovereignty just to keep a foreign film industry happy.
Hmmm, I'm wondering if I distributed a modified DeCSS binary only, would the US arrest me under Norwegian law?
"The MPAA can tell me what I can do in my home..."
They can tell you all they want, but they have absolutely no power to enforce their wishes on anyone. Not even if they succeed in convincing a court that DeCSS is illegal. Only the government has the power to go that. The problem isn't the MPAA. The problem is that the government has so much power that it's now hiring itself out as a bully to the highest bidder.
The problem here is that we have all become so dependant upon the teat of government, that just like little piggies, we get pissed when a bigger piggie comes along and pushes us away from the nipple we're sucking on.
"But if we're talking a 16 year old, they ought to have access to any info they need, regardless of what their parents think."
Nonsense. A 16 year old is still a minor and the responsibility of the parent. It is impossible to fulfill parental responsibilities when you are not allowed to do so by law. It's utterly arrogant to claim to know more than the parents about what a child needs.
"This is why I don't really like the BSD *AT TIMES* because it allows people to take a work, slap a restrictive license on it, and resell it in a way that the people who created the work on which it's based can't even use it freely."
If you take just five seconds to look at ftp.cdrom.com, you'll find that FreeBSD is still there! Yes it is! Nothing has been stolen. No copyrights have been subverted. No licenses altered. All the code that was free yesterday is still free today and will remain free tomorrow.
Lucent's patch to FreeBSD is just that, a patch. It is Lucent's code. FreeBSD did not write it, and has no claim over it. It doesn't matter if it's derived code or not, because it's still not FreeBSD's code!
"I suspect that Lucent didn't do a Linux "Eclipse" because Lucent doesn't buy into the GPL mindset."
You don't have to buy into any mindset to bring a product to the Linux market. However, there is a percpeption out there that you have to toe the "party line" or be miserably flamed into market submission. Despite the best efforts of Redat, SuSE, IBM, SGI, etc., there is a very vocal anti-commercial crowd in Linux. BSD does not have this, so it's only natural that Lucent sees BSD as being more business friendly.
You missed my analogy completely. I drink booze. But I don't get hangovers. Why? I don't let the booze control me. I'm in charge. There is a very big difference between a government with limited powers and no government at all.
Oh, and I don't know about your neighborhood, but in mine the garbage collection is done by a private company.
But then I could take that evil (aren't they all) corporation's software and pass it out on the street corner, along with the original source code!
"The large corporations tend to drive the economy of the nation."
You are mistaken. Believe it or not, the small businesses (under fifty employees) holds more economic power than the large corporations. Yes, the large corporations get better press, but it's the small business owner that get's the congressman's ear.
"Why isn't everyone on Slashdot a member of the EFF?"
Oh please! Have you considered the possibility that the EFF is a political organization and that there are at least a couple hundred different political philosophies here on slashdot? How could one organization ever hope to syncronize its politics with those of slashdot.