Before I can take your question seriously you have to define "Libertarian political structure".
How about, how could a limited government with the help of academia and/or independant business interests create a network? For example, take 18th century new england turnpike construction or 19th century railroad networks and accompanying telegraph networks. I choose such an early example because you have to go that far back to find a small government.
Regarding the walled-garden, it's inevitable since the worth of the network is proportional to the number of people on it. Unless there's a monopoly force at work, at some stage all networks must to interconnect.
Speaking as a registered libertarian, not everything in a capitalist system is done for profit (just ask the NRA or the EFF). And sometimes even innovation is done for innovation's sake.
Of course, that software is inherently "information" is what makes this work (avoiding the economic problem of scarcity). "Knowledge" doesn't cost anything to pass on. I think where those right(er) wing libertarians get their signals crossed. They assume that because we currently have an idea of "Intellectual Property" that it is in some way a fundamental freedom. Or that because we currently have corporations that can exist as entities they fundamentally are. These are just assumptions built into our system, not facts. I don't remember reading anything in Locke about intelectual property rights. And I don't see how giving software away for free is anti-capitalist.
No, if you are an anarcho-capitalist there is no such thing as a market failure. Libertarians that believe in *some* government can recognize that lack of competition is a market failure. Certain industries that have a large barrier to entry or are inelastic are prime targets for monopolistic abuse. Industries such as water, power, roads networks etc. You know, the commons.
Adam Smith said that for an economy of "perfect liberty" you must have competition and the laws of supply and demand. Thomas Jefferson tried to get a "restriction against monopolies" into the bill of rights (but failed). You'll find no two individuals more concerned with the idea of liberty.
Looks like I knew exactly how it works in seattle. After reading your legal brief (finally that business law class paid off), the Judge's conclusion shows clearly that she had the domestic partnership right to be in the room, the nurse just dismissed her anyway opening the center up to a lawsuit.
Here, the issue is whether Hulley's decision to exclude Reed was part of her efforts to treat and care for Ritchie or whether the exclusion was motivated by something other than her medical judgment. If the exclusion was to address Ritchie's medical needs, then Reed's injuries occurred as a result of health care and her common law tort claims are precluded by RCW 7.70.010 and.030. If the exclusion was not based on Ritchie's medical needs, then Reed's common law tort claims remain viable.
I don't know how it works in Seattle, but here in Los Angeles that whole sob story about not being able to visit your partner in the hospital is a load of bollocks and sensationalism. In California domestic partners have all the rights commonly whined about, excepting taking their partnership to another state. Sorry that can only be fixed on a federal level, so all these state initiatives don't get you any closer. This entire issue is one of mostly semantics.
Spoken like someone who has never had to deal with this issue. The problem is not that the records are public, it's that these websites are endorsing a targeted intimidation campaign against those who signed (or donated) to what they deem is an "evil" cause.
I personally know someone who was harassed and blackballed in a media company until they resigned. I've also know people who have had their personal beliefs posted on reviews of their businesses to target their livelyhood. I've even seen people taking pictures of those who enter and leave places of worship.
Sorry, but voting for what you believe in doesn't sound like oppression to me. The above fits the bill though. -
Wow, you managed to hate on Alsa, Linux, Gnome, C++ and the End User all in one post. Condolulations, this may be the most faddish post I've ever seen.
I've done business in the world of free software for 14 years now, ever since I began selling tapes of GNU Emacs in 1985, and I agree with Jamie Zawinski (as quoted in Stig's article) that free software and greed are not incompatible -- at least, most of the time they can coexist. But greed alone will not protect our freedom. There are occasions where defending freedom requires a special effort, an effort that requires a motivation beyond material gain.
I you were a starting entrepreneur who wanted to become one of those large internet radio stations some day your view might be different. Artificially high barriers of entry into an industry are rarely beneficial to society. From a purely economic standpoint, competition is generally a good thing.
I think it's because if you type the wrong wireless key it will often accept it but your connection just won't work. In that case, it's might be more "user friendly" to try to catch the mistake before letting it be submitted.
It's called multiseat. It's a feature that's targetted for the next version of Fedora Linux . I'm not sure if there's any way to do it under windows but vmware or virtualbox might help when Fedora 12 comes out.
Since Sun has had mysql they've had a disasterous release, a mass exodus of their mysql developers, and at least three forks. If that is great management and strong leadership then I stand corrected.
I didn't think I needed to expand on Oracle since everyone is speculating about whether mysql even has a future.
I would question this guy's motives trying to take back MySQL after selling it to Sun, if it wasn't for the fact that Sun and now Oracle have done such a poor job with it. Whether or not you hate MySQL, if it's going to improve it needs someone to move the project forward.
Qt had repeatedly refused to change it's license before gnome was started. Qt found itself benefiting from a major open source movement, which would not have continued while an open alternative was available and maturing.
No, what drove Trolltech into relicensing Qt under the GPL was that KDE had built on Qt assuming that it was open source and then discovered that the Qt license was incompatible with KDE. If Trolltech hadn't relicensed Qt, KDE would have been dead, and that would have been very, very bad for Qt.
This is such historical revisionism. QT had repeatedly rejected KDE's request to change their license. Gnome was started because of this fact. It wasn't until gnome matured and GTK threatened to make QT irrelevant that they finally capitulated.
Qt and KDE were a major incentive for Gnome to get its act together.
I find it almost funny how when you talk about customers getting overcharged-- "overcharged" in the sense that they're paying far most than something costs to produce-- everyone comes out of the woodwork to say, "Of course! This is capitalism! It's about supply and demand, and charging what the market will bear." Then these same people, when you mention that some regulation will increase the cost of production, they complain, "Well that cost is just going to get passed along to consumers!" Well you can't have it both ways.
Yes, but the second tenant of capitalism is that increasing competition drives all profit towards zero.
When you are talking about a government granted monopoly, the same rules don't apply. If increased prices are being caused by government intervention then you can realistically say that price is "passed" to the consumers without contradicting yourself.
Microsoft has a rule that gamertags can't be anything that is "potentially" offensive.
Someone I know had "Queer" in their gamertag and they were forced to change it. The person in question was not gay, so perhaps this is the best policy, but there are a few of potential problems. The first is that there is, believe it or not, different definitions for words such as the one mentioned above. The second is what happened here, where someone really is gay. Doesn't matter though, they either have to enforce it every time or not at all. Finally, who's to say what's offensive? I have another friend who had their gamertag banned because it contained the word "Fart".
share insurance, file taxes together, and visit each other in the hospital
due to domestic partnership law. In fact the only difference between domestic partnership and marriage is on a federal level, which won't be affected one bit by passing same sex marriage in California because it's still not recognized federally and available across all states.
Creating laws to charge people with after the fact is a fast track to tyranny. There is no rule of law per se only the state's will to prosecute, since everyone has necessarily broken laws that are not yet written. Please review history.
Which is why I think Yahoo is partially to blame for allowing password resets from this kind of information. How many articles have been posted to slashdot about the insecurity of this method of authentication?
Just because he's not co-located doesn't mean he's on a shared server. If he's on a dedicated server then he can reasonably expect that the server is for his own use and that their hardware techs wouldn't be looking at his data.
On the other hand, I think that since he asked for help in the first place It would be reasonable that they would check any db tables potentially related to the problem in question.
I had the same problem for most of my dating life, with being "too nice". It seems odd that there would be such a thing but there is. I finally got so tired of of getting broken up with the "You are so wonderful, it's not you, it's me" line, that I changed my dating habits completely. I am now happily married and able to let a my natural niceness show through, but to get to that point required the following self-imposed rules.
1. Do not give more than you get from a woman, either emotionally or materially. It is not impressive to them. It's a complete turn off. You might have short term success but in the long term you will lose them.
2. Do not let them do screwed up things to you, and if they do - tell them you are upset about it and act accordingly. Failure to do this makes you weak, and weak is not attractive.
3. If they ever turn you down/break up with you say okay and DO NOT CONTACT them. Be aloof. You have no chance with them at this point unless they come back to you, which they won't if you are still acting weak (which is probably why they left you in the first place).
There's a few more rules but those seem to be the major ones I've broken and I see broken over and over.
Yeah, I've always found it interesting how often they refuse to work on commonly requested features (voice/video anyone?) or take any community input.
If I were them I would take notice of all the talk of including Empathy as the new Gnome IM client. It doesn't even use pidgin's libpurple - it uses telepathy and farsight. If they don't watch out they're going to go the way of XFree86 (with how often the developers repeat that they don't care what their users want, perhaps that's their goal.)
Slashdot Mirror
Before I can take your question seriously you have to define "Libertarian political structure".
How about, how could a limited government with the help of academia and/or independant business interests create a network? For example, take 18th century new england turnpike construction or 19th century railroad networks and accompanying telegraph networks. I choose such an early example because you have to go that far back to find a small government.
Regarding the walled-garden, it's inevitable since the worth of the network is proportional to the number of people on it. Unless there's a monopoly force at work, at some stage all networks must to interconnect.
Speaking as a registered libertarian, not everything in a capitalist system is done for profit (just ask the NRA or the EFF). And sometimes even innovation is done for innovation's sake.
Of course, that software is inherently "information" is what makes this work (avoiding the economic problem of scarcity). "Knowledge" doesn't cost anything to pass on. I think where those right(er) wing libertarians get their signals crossed. They assume that because we currently have an idea of "Intellectual Property" that it is in some way a fundamental freedom. Or that because we currently have corporations that can exist as entities they fundamentally are. These are just assumptions built into our system, not facts. I don't remember reading anything in Locke about intelectual property rights. And I don't see how giving software away for free is anti-capitalist.
No, if you are an anarcho-capitalist there is no such thing as a market failure. Libertarians that believe in *some* government can recognize that lack of competition is a market failure. Certain industries that have a large barrier to entry or are inelastic are prime targets for monopolistic abuse. Industries such as water, power, roads networks etc. You know, the commons.
Adam Smith said that for an economy of "perfect liberty" you must have competition and the laws of supply and demand. Thomas Jefferson tried to get a "restriction against monopolies" into the bill of rights (but failed). You'll find no two individuals more concerned with the idea of liberty.
Looks like I knew exactly how it works in seattle. After reading your legal brief (finally that business law class paid off), the Judge's conclusion shows clearly that she had the domestic partnership right to be in the room, the nurse just dismissed her anyway opening the center up to a lawsuit.
Here, the issue is whether Hulley's decision to exclude Reed was part of her efforts to treat and care for Ritchie or whether the exclusion was motivated by something other than her medical judgment. If the exclusion was to address Ritchie's medical needs, then Reed's injuries occurred as a result of health care and her common law tort claims are precluded by RCW 7.70.010 and .030. If the exclusion was not based on Ritchie's medical needs, then Reed's common law tort claims remain viable.
I don't know how it works in Seattle, but here in Los Angeles that whole sob story about not being able to visit your partner in the hospital is a load of bollocks and sensationalism. In California domestic partners have all the rights commonly whined about, excepting taking their partnership to another state. Sorry that can only be fixed on a federal level, so all these state initiatives don't get you any closer. This entire issue is one of mostly semantics.
Spoken like someone who has never had to deal with this issue. The problem is not that the records are public, it's that these websites are endorsing a targeted intimidation campaign against those who signed (or donated) to what they deem is an "evil" cause.
I personally know someone who was harassed and blackballed in a media company until they resigned. I've also know people who have had their personal beliefs posted on reviews of their businesses to target their livelyhood. I've even seen people taking pictures of those who enter and leave places of worship.
Sorry, but voting for what you believe in doesn't sound like oppression to me. The above fits the bill though.
-
Wow, you managed to hate on Alsa, Linux, Gnome, C++ and the End User all in one post. Condolulations, this may be the most faddish post I've ever seen.
On the "spirit of GPL" issue, the developer is wrong. As long as I can remember RMS has encouraged companies to sell GPL'd software.
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9911/08/freedom.GNU.idg/index.html
I've done business in the world of free software for 14 years now, ever since I began selling tapes of GNU Emacs in 1985, and I agree with Jamie Zawinski (as quoted in Stig's article) that free software and greed are not incompatible -- at least, most of the time they can coexist. But greed alone will not protect our freedom. There are occasions where defending freedom requires a special effort, an effort that requires a motivation beyond material gain.
I you were a starting entrepreneur who wanted to become one of those large internet radio stations some day your view might be different. Artificially high barriers of entry into an industry are rarely beneficial to society. From a purely economic standpoint, competition is generally a good thing.
I think it's because if you type the wrong wireless key it will often accept it but your connection just won't work. In that case, it's might be more "user friendly" to try to catch the mistake before letting it be submitted.
It's called multiseat. It's a feature that's targetted for the next version of Fedora Linux . I'm not sure if there's any way to do it under windows but vmware or virtualbox might help when Fedora 12 comes out.
Since Sun has had mysql they've had a disasterous release, a mass exodus of their mysql developers, and at least three forks. If that is great management and strong leadership then I stand corrected.
I didn't think I needed to expand on Oracle since everyone is speculating about whether mysql even has a future.
I would question this guy's motives trying to take back MySQL after selling it to Sun, if it wasn't for the fact that Sun and now Oracle have done such a poor job with it. Whether or not you hate MySQL, if it's going to improve it needs someone to move the project forward.
Does anyone really see Oracle doing that?
Interesting ignorance of history...
Qt had repeatedly refused to change it's license before gnome was started. Qt found itself benefiting from a major open source movement, which would not have continued while an open alternative was available and maturing.
No, what drove Trolltech into relicensing Qt under the GPL was that KDE had built on Qt assuming that it was open source and then discovered that the Qt license was incompatible with KDE. If Trolltech hadn't relicensed Qt, KDE would have been dead, and that would have been very, very bad for Qt.
This is such historical revisionism. QT had repeatedly rejected KDE's request to change their license. Gnome was started because of this fact. It wasn't until gnome matured and GTK threatened to make QT irrelevant that they finally capitulated.
Qt and KDE were a major incentive for Gnome to get its act together.
True, but it was the other way around first.
I find it almost funny how when you talk about customers getting overcharged-- "overcharged" in the sense that they're paying far most than something costs to produce-- everyone comes out of the woodwork to say, "Of course! This is capitalism! It's about supply and demand, and charging what the market will bear." Then these same people, when you mention that some regulation will increase the cost of production, they complain, "Well that cost is just going to get passed along to consumers!" Well you can't have it both ways.
Yes, but the second tenant of capitalism is that increasing competition drives all profit towards zero.
When you are talking about a government granted monopoly, the same rules don't apply. If increased prices are being caused by government intervention then you can realistically say that price is "passed" to the consumers without contradicting yourself.
Microsoft has a rule that gamertags can't be anything that is "potentially" offensive.
Someone I know had "Queer" in their gamertag and they were forced to change it. The person in question was not gay, so perhaps this is the best policy, but there are a few of potential problems. The first is that there is, believe it or not, different definitions for words such as the one mentioned above. The second is what happened here, where someone really is gay. Doesn't matter though, they either have to enforce it every time or not at all. Finally, who's to say what's offensive? I have another friend who had their gamertag banned because it contained the word "Fart".
The parent is probably referring to this: http://bash.org/?330261
In California same sex couples can already
share insurance, file taxes together, and visit each other in the hospital
due to domestic partnership law. In fact the only difference between domestic partnership and marriage is on a federal level, which won't be affected one bit by passing same sex marriage in California because it's still not recognized federally and available across all states.
This entire debate is really semantics.
Creating laws to charge people with after the fact is a fast track to tyranny. There is no rule of law per se only the state's will to prosecute, since everyone has necessarily broken laws that are not yet written. Please review history.
Adobe isn't going to GPL Flash just because people complain it isn't "free".
That's true, they'll only open source flash when gnash arrives at near feature parity.
Which is why I think Yahoo is partially to blame for allowing password resets from this kind of information. How many articles have been posted to slashdot about the insecurity of this method of authentication?
Just because he's not co-located doesn't mean he's on a shared server. If he's on a dedicated server then he can reasonably expect that the server is for his own use and that their hardware techs wouldn't be looking at his data.
On the other hand, I think that since he asked for help in the first place It would be reasonable that they would check any db tables potentially related to the problem in question.
I had the same problem for most of my dating life, with being "too nice". It seems odd that there would be such a thing but there is. I finally got so tired of of getting broken up with the "You are so wonderful, it's not you, it's me" line, that I changed my dating habits completely. I am now happily married and able to let a my natural niceness show through, but to get to that point required the following self-imposed rules.
1. Do not give more than you get from a woman, either emotionally or materially. It is not impressive to them. It's a complete turn off. You might have short term success but in the long term you will lose them.
2. Do not let them do screwed up things to you, and if they do - tell them you are upset about it and act accordingly. Failure to do this makes you weak, and weak is not attractive.
3. If they ever turn you down/break up with you say okay and DO NOT CONTACT them. Be aloof. You have no chance with them at this point unless they come back to you, which they won't if you are still acting weak (which is probably why they left you in the first place).
There's a few more rules but those seem to be the major ones I've broken and I see broken over and over.
Yeah, I've always found it interesting how often they refuse to work on commonly requested features (voice/video anyone?) or take any community input.
If I were them I would take notice of all the talk of including Empathy as the new Gnome IM client. It doesn't even use pidgin's libpurple - it uses telepathy and farsight. If they don't watch out they're going to go the way of XFree86 (with how often the developers repeat that they don't care what their users want, perhaps that's their goal.)