No shit. You should see me when I use smileys inappropriately in hopes of others understanding me better. Then I screw up the most. Unless it's such a damn common cliche to _know_ that 8 out of 10 people will consider it funny, don't use a smiley.
Your misunderstanding of me is a prime example of why one should not live (or die) strictly by their convictions/beliefs. You get bent over and grab your ankles one too many times that way.
> I thought it was evident: it is a common standard between people.
Hm, I beg to differ. It is not evident to me at all. We, savages from the Balkans, think women should know how to cook and that women should be virgins before they get married (ok, I lucked out on both counts, but that's God's hand, not by choice).
Now, suppose this is a moral standard by my people. So, what happens when someone doesn't share that standard with me, and not only that, he is ready to DIE for it, and fight for HIS convictions to death, and argue HIS convictions at the top of his lungs. Let's put that "common standard" to test. What do you think will happen when I show up and argue my moral standards in front of those that disagree with me, and there are millions bound to disagree with me on this one? You can flip that around, as in, I consider it a moral standard for women to have been sluts before marriage and can't cook a burger... and argue that in Sharia countries....
> Right on the first account, wrong on the second (just look around in the world, not just the "Western" part).
I'll say right on both accounts, but before you disagree with me, you certainly need to provide what you mean by look around the world, not just the western part, as relating to economics being a fluid concept. Did you mean that living conditions aren't the same around the planet, as in living conditions in the West aren't the same as in the Palestine or Rwanda?
Ok.. those who have money to start a company solvent enough to pay you came up with that money once, and can probably come up with it again, even after foreclosing their business.
Can you guess what my next statement will be after you've mastered communication and language around other? Ready to pony up?
In case you missed it, I was in violent agreement with you and I explained why your point of view was as correct as the opposing one, from different perspectives, in different contexts.
It is precisely that "meaning" I was talking about. The meaning is assigned in context, not out of context. And it is assigned by you. And you as different in the way you assign meaning than the 6 billion others walking the planet, as you are physiologically identical to all other 6 billion people.
You know, I totally dig libertarianism, which obviously you are (or else you wouldn't be pointing to antiwar.com as your freakin' home page), but the problem is, it doesn't work. Just like communism will never work. I think pure libertarianism is as bad as communism actually, but then again, that's just my view. It's kind of like saying, let's all rely on people's good will and conscicentiousness that they will never infringe on the freedom of others, and that we can always talk someone into action....
Well, it doesn't work like that. Your inflated ego won't let you see my point of view, therefore, by virtually talking to you and providing arguments, regardless of how logical they are and backed by educated opinions from others, I'm betting I still won't be able to convince you into my point of view. That's because however you arrived to the point of having 'antiwar.com' as your home page, has probably indoctrinated you enough to think that every republican in congress is a rotten swine and wants to bury America, and now the Democrats are probably out to sell us out too, right? Wrong.
From this keyboard, I am the next Chinese tzar. From up there, you only get to fuck up once, and people crucify you mercilessley.
So... master Yoda of the Liberal species... unless you have a way of enforcing libertarian policies on 300 million people... or better yet, I'll make that 6 billion people, and you can bring them all to understand concepts of economics, free will, psychology, pragmatism, enlightement, verbal onanisms, immortal ideologies, pure thoughts, fragile sensibilities, better doctrines, philosophy, nirvana, etc etc etc - please, lay off the keyboard.
> Is it murder to lie in wait for a burglar and kill him when he enters your home?
No. But you just re-framed the argument. And I don't think most people here think in relatives but in absolutes when they hear "morality" ejected out in the cold.
Just like when they hear "Britney Spears", all they think is blonde dumb bimbo, "not-a-virgin" fraudster, stupid hick - but when they hear "Britney Spears dumps K-Fed", they think "blonde angel", "clever girl", or when they hear "Britney Spears pre-empts K-Fed by giving away 90 minute (or 4 hours, whicheve) porn tapes for free", now they even think "KILLER MOVE, BUSINESS WOMAN, etc etc".
Shit - what happened to blonde bimbo and stupid hick?:)
Now, anyone else want to read some Nietszche or Sartre for me?:)
What makes people burn your flag and fly your planes is leaders of countries, religious preachers, and biblical instruments who preach that it is moral to kill infidels by flying planes and express resentment by burning flags.
Morality is a fluid concept. Economics isn't. The two concept though can certainly co-exist and co-operate. Why won't those who understand neither take a hint from someone that understands both?
Can you please define what you meant by morals now, in your worldview?
If you PayPal me $100 dollars right now, I will tell you (in an email dialogue) a different way of how you could've handled the issue differently and not only hold onto your last job at the game company, but actually switch to a different position in the same company, where you would've worked 40 hours a week, just as you do now.
Anything short of that, I congratulate you on your ascetic experience in ethics, little Buddha.
Here's a spoiler for you: before you can preach ethics, you have to master other things, like communication and language. They don't teach much of that in business ethics, do they? All they teach you there is how to apply some rules, in a black or white manner, without previously weighing in the risks of your actions properly, and without due self reflection before you open your mouth. Could it be that you were unduly influenced by your ethics class that swayed your judgment about the T-Shirt design contest? Was the logo a _straight rip_ (e.g. show me a URL with the image of both logos) or was it "look&feel" type of rip?
You know, it all starts with a noble idea.... Stalin was probably a very noble man with some very cool ideas... and I understand your concern about balance, not turning into a sociopath... but it ain't that easy walking in the middle. So unless you're mother Theresa or something, I can't see what your problem is with my quote.
I understand morality from just about every angle imaginable. Notice, I'm honest,and I only say I _understand_ rather than believe in it. I actually doubt you believe in morality too, and it's easy to look good by poking holes in my argument. But I didn't really want to look good. All I wanted is to save this poor sap's job, and possibly prevent him from making future moral-based decisions until he is in a position to do so.
How's this one for a quote - "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Spin it against me please.
I don't get it - are you saying _naturalized_ U.S. citizens are not to be given security clearance? That's the first I hear of it, unless this is a recent policy change. I've been in this country since I was 16 years old.
I think you should visit playboy.com, subscribe, and relieve yourself of all that pent-up hostility from the moral dilemmas you're facing on a daily basis.
By the way, I just got my US citizenship this January, do you guys hire experienced software engineers with expert knowledge of C, C++, Java, some perl, some php and some ruby, and a lifetime of UNIX (or UNIX-clone) based development?:) I love my current job, we develop OCR software for a major entity in the U.S.A., and about the only thing cooler than that would probably be developing embedded real-time software for missile guidance. That'd top playboy.com in terms of excitement.
There's a small caveat there - if your boss is a dick (on the off chance), if you state your moral objection, he might perceive you as a primma donna. Depending on your boss' tenure/reputation in the company (you DID keep your eyes open to notice this up to this point, right?), at that point you will have two choices - leave or stay. Depending on what the moral of the story you tell yourself is as a result of your boss' inability to yield to your objection, you will then again be left with one of two "feelings" (notice the binary pattern in choices - do or don't) - one of moral superiority, followed by resentment and unhappiness (or a few other choice words that you will use to describe the 'feelings' that will follow the rejection), or another, less likely "feeling" - of "who gives a shit, let's move on and see things his way."
It is at that point where the boys get separated from the men, as they say in the army. And, no, I'm not an army person. I'm an experienced senior software engineer, with a CS degree and 10 years of software engineering experience.
Good day now.
p.s. if you think finding another job will vindicate you - think again.
I think your/. nickname probably oughta get changed to "Overly Generalizing Guy":). What makes you think the same types of problems that plagued Apple are currently plaguing Microsoft? The two are playing, AFAIK, entirely two different ball games with their respective OS.
The reasons you outline above are precisely why Sun did not release Java with BSD style licensing, but rather opted for GPL. So that no one particular entity with massive amounts of money can benefit from it without giving back to the community.
What's wrong with Google taking BeOS (or Haiku OS or whatever it's called now) and fully developing it? Beats dwelling on Linux or Mac OS X for a friendly desktop GUI. Google has the megaballs to swing something of that magnitude.
breed a bunch of K-12 workers, who don't care about college education, while importing H1-B's to do the work of those K-12'ers who didn't want to go to college. Sounds like the U.S. government is turning on its citizens by turning them into cretins.
So, should we blame the government that it had to dumb down the K-12 programs or should we blame the kids that have no sense of personal responsibility/self-discipline to get through high school and enroll in college?
Really - before you go any further - where does the blame lie? Or better yet, where do _REALLY_ personal responsibility and self-discipline begin or are taught?
I'm really sick and tired of hearing how victimized kids are in the United States. Yes, programs have been dumbed down, but on the account of what? As a God damn reaction to someone's bickering, lobbying, bitching, complaining, etc - to the government/board of edcuation, etc. and by voting people in who are more agreeable with what irresponsible parents think about the US educational system.
The desire to learn, be responsible and disciplined comes from "within" - and that "within" is shaped on a clean slate when you're at a very young age. Not at 17 or 18, or later in life. I'm not saying it's easy to raise children. I'm just saying blaming the government for your lack of doing this is preposterous.
You reap what you sow. If you don't like it, next year, sow something else or reap the same crappy crop again.
when everyone's constantly moving in and out of the area over the last couple of years? Used to be where I come from people stay in one place forever... Not sure that trend is here anymore. Whether that's bad or good, is debatable. Lives change, and you don't know where you'll be going next.... whether due to a job or something else.
This is slightly on topic, but when talking about neighbors.. I haven't known mine real well in the US at all, and I've lived here for 14 years.
> But in practice, this only works in the presence of a completely informed and rational population, which you can never realistically achieve (regardless of good will) because of the sheer scale > of what's involved.
I've debated this with so many people, I can't even recall how many times it has come up. Coming from ex-Yugoslavia, and having lived in the USA for 14 years now (just got my citizenship recently earlier this year), I can appreciate the differences between dictatorships/monism and the system in place in the USA, UK, and other developed countries.
However, if there is one stark, glaring issue with democracy is the fact that people vote like sheep. They tend to believe the 2 major parties each time they trip over each other's promises, thinking next time around it will be different if we elect the "other" one. Sort of like believing that the invasion of Iraq is nearing an end because now the Democrats are in power, when it was those same Democrats that declared the war on Iraq 3 or so years ago when the US invaded. So, if it is truly in the interest of the American public that they pull out of Iraq, should they not have checked the voting record of the Democrats, Republicans and everyone else a few years ago (it's available for those that want to look at it), and voted for candidates that are NOT sponsored by either the Dems or the GOP?
This points to a lack of informed opinion. If I am going to vote for someone to represent my views, should I not find a candidate that represents my views clearly and unambigiously, and vote for that candidate? Then if they fail to deliver, out the door they go in the next election, but at least you know you voted with your mind, not whimsically or superficially based on irrelevant or half-truthful factors?
That's the only problem with democracy - people are not liquid enough in their choices - they vote because they figured if their dad voted republican or democrat all their life, so should they - well you are WRONG! You ain't your dad, and your dad's times ain't your times - therefore your views and opinions should be representative of the current context, and not based on past circumstances.
This is why I think a college degree should be the required minimum before participating in an election. So the next response to this is that you'd be curtailing the rights of many taxpayers/citizens who do not have college degrees to vote? Yeah, so what's your point? If they could not care less to think through their choices or voted automatically because someone told them so for someone, then they do not deserve to vote. Minimum education should be required. IT just so happens that people who are diligent enough to work through a college degree might actually read what it says on the voting pamphlets mailed out to us before every election and decide on a candidate who truly represents them, and not some wordy slickster.
I remember reading some wirelss/3G forum posts of people who already tested this some time ago and it turns out only CDMA2000 (or WCDMA) based 3G networks are able to run VOIP (e.g.Skype) without any issues. This means that only Sprint and Verizon Wireless (and others who are CDMA based), in areas with EVDO coverage + unlimited data plans will be able to enjoy this, and most of the US is still on CDMA 2000 1X (for now, at least).
Already did that. All Ubuntu Edgy Eft - about the only thing I do not have is Skype Webcam support - my mom uses Skype since we live an ocean apart to communicate with me so it's nice to be able for her to see me. Logitech has no Linux drivers for the QuickCam Pro 5000. Other than that I have everything I am interested in running on a desktop which is virtually flawless (pretty too). For the rare occasion I need to play a game or two, I have dual booting into WinXPPro set up. I was thinking of buying Cedega, but that sounds a little dicey even though they have a lot of games working.
While I understand that keeping the legacy Windows baggage around forever is required for most companies, it isn't so for me, a home user. The change starts at home. Now if people would only try out Ubuntu and see what I'm talking about.... It's easier to install than Windows too:).
To your point, I found Ubuntu to be the most polished Linux desktop of all. Everything I cared for, works with little effort spent on getting it to work. The only thing that disappoints me is lack of drivers for Logitech webcams (I have the quickcam pro 5000 model). Logitech does not want to write the drivers for one reason or another ("not enough demand" I suppose).
Slashdot Mirror
No shit. You should see me when I use smileys inappropriately in hopes of others understanding me better. Then I screw up the most. Unless it's such a damn common cliche to _know_ that 8 out of 10 people will consider it funny, don't use a smiley.
Your misunderstanding of me is a prime example of why one should not live (or die) strictly by their convictions/beliefs. You get bent over and grab your ankles one too many times that way.
I should know, I been there.
> I thought it was evident: it is a common standard between people.
Hm, I beg to differ. It is not evident to me at all. We, savages from the Balkans, think women should know how to cook and that women should be virgins before they get married (ok, I lucked out on both counts, but that's God's hand, not by choice).
Now, suppose this is a moral standard by my people. So, what happens when someone doesn't share that standard with me, and not only that, he is ready to DIE for it, and fight for HIS convictions to death, and argue HIS convictions at the top of his lungs. Let's put that "common standard" to test. What do you think will happen when I show up and argue my moral standards in front of those that disagree with me, and there are millions bound to disagree with me on this one? You can flip that around, as in, I consider it a moral standard for women to have been sluts before marriage and can't cook a burger... and argue that in Sharia countries....
> Right on the first account, wrong on the second (just look around in the world, not just the "Western" part).
I'll say right on both accounts, but before you disagree with me, you certainly need to provide what you mean by look around the world, not just the western part, as relating to economics being a fluid concept. Did you mean that living conditions aren't the same around the planet, as in living conditions in the West aren't the same as in the Palestine or Rwanda?
Ok.. those who have money to start a company solvent enough to pay you came up with that money once, and can probably come up with it again, even after foreclosing their business.
Can you guess what my next statement will be after you've mastered communication and language around other? Ready to pony up?
Read my sig, bitch.
In case you missed it, I was in violent agreement with you and I explained why your point of view was as correct as the opposing one, from different perspectives, in different contexts.
It is precisely that "meaning" I was talking about. The meaning is assigned in context, not out of context. And it is assigned by you. And you as different in the way you assign meaning than the 6 billion others walking the planet, as you are physiologically identical to all other 6 billion people.
Dig it?
You know, I totally dig libertarianism, which obviously you are (or else you wouldn't be pointing to antiwar.com as your freakin' home page), but the problem is, it doesn't work. Just like communism will never work. I think pure libertarianism is as bad as communism actually, but then again, that's just my view. It's kind of like saying, let's all rely on people's good will and conscicentiousness that they will never infringe on the freedom of others, and that we can always talk someone into action....
Well, it doesn't work like that. Your inflated ego won't let you see my point of view, therefore, by virtually talking to you and providing arguments, regardless of how logical they are and backed by educated opinions from others, I'm betting I still won't be able to convince you into my point of view. That's because however you arrived to the point of having 'antiwar.com' as your home page, has probably indoctrinated you enough to think that every republican in congress is a rotten swine and wants to bury America, and now the Democrats are probably out to sell us out too, right? Wrong.
From this keyboard, I am the next Chinese tzar. From up there, you only get to fuck up once, and people crucify you mercilessley.
So... master Yoda of the Liberal species... unless you have a way of enforcing libertarian policies on 300 million people... or better yet, I'll make that 6 billion people, and you can bring them all to understand concepts of economics, free will, psychology, pragmatism, enlightement, verbal onanisms, immortal ideologies, pure thoughts, fragile sensibilities, better doctrines, philosophy, nirvana, etc etc etc - please, lay off the keyboard.
> Is it murder to lie in wait for a burglar and kill him when he enters your home?
:)
:)
No. But you just re-framed the argument. And I don't think most people here think in relatives but in absolutes when they hear "morality" ejected out in the cold.
Just like when they hear "Britney Spears", all they think is blonde dumb bimbo, "not-a-virgin" fraudster, stupid hick - but when they hear "Britney Spears dumps K-Fed", they think "blonde angel", "clever girl", or when they hear "Britney Spears pre-empts K-Fed by giving away 90 minute (or 4 hours, whicheve) porn tapes for free", now they even think "KILLER MOVE, BUSINESS WOMAN, etc etc".
Shit - what happened to blonde bimbo and stupid hick?
Now, anyone else want to read some Nietszche or Sartre for me?
What makes people burn your flag and fly your planes is leaders of countries, religious preachers, and biblical instruments who preach that it is moral to kill infidels by flying planes and express resentment by burning flags.
Morality is a fluid concept. Economics isn't. The two concept though can certainly co-exist and co-operate. Why won't those who understand neither take a hint from someone that understands both?
Can you please define what you meant by morals now, in your worldview?
If you PayPal me $100 dollars right now, I will tell you (in an email dialogue) a different way of how you could've handled the issue differently and not only hold onto your last job at the game company, but actually switch to a different position in the same company, where you would've worked 40 hours a week, just as you do now.
Anything short of that, I congratulate you on your ascetic experience in ethics, little Buddha.
Here's a spoiler for you: before you can preach ethics, you have to master other things, like communication and language. They don't teach much of that in business ethics, do they? All they teach you there is how to apply some rules, in a black or white manner, without previously weighing in the risks of your actions properly, and without due self reflection before you open your mouth. Could it be that you were unduly influenced by your ethics class that swayed your judgment about the T-Shirt design contest? Was the logo a _straight rip_ (e.g. show me a URL with the image of both logos) or was it "look&feel" type of rip?
More to follow once you pay up.
You know, it all starts with a noble idea.... Stalin was probably a very noble man with some very cool ideas... and I understand your concern about balance, not turning into a sociopath... but it ain't that easy walking in the middle. So unless you're mother Theresa or something, I can't see what your problem is with my quote.
I understand morality from just about every angle imaginable. Notice, I'm honest,and I only say I _understand_ rather than believe in it. I actually doubt you believe in morality too, and it's easy to look good by poking holes in my argument. But I didn't really want to look good. All I wanted is to save this poor sap's job, and possibly prevent him from making future moral-based decisions until he is in a position to do so.
How's this one for a quote - "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Spin it against me please.
I don't get it - are you saying _naturalized_ U.S. citizens are not to be given security clearance? That's the first I hear of it, unless this is a recent policy change. I've been in this country since I was 16 years old.
"Death solves all problems: no man, no problem." - Joseph Stalin
I think you should visit playboy.com, subscribe, and relieve yourself of all that pent-up hostility from the moral dilemmas you're facing on a daily basis.
:) I love my current job, we develop OCR software for a major entity in the U.S.A., and about the only thing cooler than that would probably be developing embedded real-time software for missile guidance. That'd top playboy.com in terms of excitement.
By the way, I just got my US citizenship this January, do you guys hire experienced software engineers with expert knowledge of C, C++, Java, some perl, some php and some ruby, and a lifetime of UNIX (or UNIX-clone) based development?
There's a small caveat there - if your boss is a dick (on the off chance), if you state your moral objection, he might perceive you as a primma donna. Depending on your boss' tenure/reputation in the company (you DID keep your eyes open to notice this up to this point, right?), at that point you will have two choices - leave or stay. Depending on what the moral of the story you tell yourself is as a result of your boss' inability to yield to your objection, you will then again be left with one of two "feelings" (notice the binary pattern in choices - do or don't) - one of moral superiority, followed by resentment and unhappiness (or a few other choice words that you will use to describe the 'feelings' that will follow the rejection), or another, less likely "feeling" - of "who gives a shit, let's move on and see things his way."
It is at that point where the boys get separated from the men, as they say in the army. And, no, I'm not an army person. I'm an experienced senior software engineer, with a CS degree and 10 years of software engineering experience.
Good day now.
p.s. if you think finding another job will vindicate you - think again.
I think your /. nickname probably oughta get changed to "Overly Generalizing Guy" :). What makes you think the same types of problems that plagued Apple are currently plaguing Microsoft? The two are playing, AFAIK, entirely two different ball games with their respective OS.
The reasons you outline above are precisely why Sun did not release Java with BSD style licensing, but rather opted for GPL. So that no one particular entity with massive amounts of money can benefit from it without giving back to the community.
What's wrong with Google taking BeOS (or Haiku OS or whatever it's called now) and fully developing it? Beats dwelling on Linux or Mac OS X for a friendly desktop GUI. Google has the megaballs to swing something of that magnitude.
breed a bunch of K-12 workers, who don't care about college education, while importing H1-B's to do the work of those K-12'ers who didn't want to go to college. Sounds like the U.S. government is turning on its citizens by turning them into cretins.
So, should we blame the government that it had to dumb down the K-12 programs or should we blame the kids that have no sense of personal responsibility/self-discipline to get through high school and enroll in college?
Really - before you go any further - where does the blame lie? Or better yet, where do _REALLY_ personal responsibility and self-discipline begin or are taught?
I'm really sick and tired of hearing how victimized kids are in the United States. Yes, programs have been dumbed down, but on the account of what? As a God damn reaction to someone's bickering, lobbying, bitching, complaining, etc - to the government/board of edcuation, etc. and by voting people in who are more agreeable with what irresponsible parents think about the US educational system.
The desire to learn, be responsible and disciplined comes from "within" - and that "within" is shaped on a clean slate when you're at a very young age. Not at 17 or 18, or later in life. I'm not saying it's easy to raise children. I'm just saying blaming the government for your lack of doing this is preposterous.
You reap what you sow. If you don't like it, next year, sow something else or reap the same crappy crop again.
when everyone's constantly moving in and out of the area over the last couple of years? Used to be where I come from people stay in one place forever ... Not sure that trend is here anymore. Whether that's bad or good, is debatable. Lives change, and you don't know where you'll be going next.... whether due to a job or something else.
This is slightly on topic, but when talking about neighbors.. I haven't known mine real well in the US at all, and I've lived here for 14 years.
plain stupid. There can be no comparison.
> But in practice, this only works in the presence of a completely informed and rational population, which you can never realistically achieve (regardless of good will) because of the sheer scale
> of what's involved.
I've debated this with so many people, I can't even recall how many times it has come up. Coming from ex-Yugoslavia, and having lived in the USA for 14 years now (just got my citizenship recently earlier this year), I can appreciate the differences between dictatorships/monism and the system in place in the USA, UK, and other developed countries.
However, if there is one stark, glaring issue with democracy is the fact that people vote like sheep. They tend to believe the 2 major parties each time they trip over each other's promises, thinking next time around it will be different if we elect the "other" one. Sort of like believing that the invasion of Iraq is nearing an end because now the Democrats are in power, when it was those same Democrats that declared the war on Iraq 3 or so years ago when the US invaded. So, if it is truly in the interest of the American public that they pull out of Iraq, should they not have checked the voting record of the Democrats, Republicans and everyone else a few years ago (it's available for those that want to look at it), and voted for candidates that are NOT sponsored by either the Dems or the GOP?
This points to a lack of informed opinion. If I am going to vote for someone to represent my views, should I not find a candidate that represents my views clearly and unambigiously, and vote for that candidate? Then if they fail to deliver, out the door they go in the next election, but at least you know you voted with your mind, not whimsically or superficially based on irrelevant or half-truthful factors?
That's the only problem with democracy - people are not liquid enough in their choices - they vote because they figured if their dad voted republican or democrat all their life, so should they - well you are WRONG! You ain't your dad, and your dad's times ain't your times - therefore your views and opinions should be representative of the current context, and not based on past circumstances.
This is why I think a college degree should be the required minimum before participating in an election. So the next response to this is that you'd be curtailing the rights of many taxpayers/citizens who do not have college degrees to vote? Yeah, so what's your point? If they could not care less to think through their choices or voted automatically because someone told them so for someone, then they do not deserve to vote. Minimum education should be required. IT just so happens that people who are diligent enough to work through a college degree might actually read what it says on the voting pamphlets mailed out to us before every election and decide on a candidate who truly represents them, and not some wordy slickster.
G'day.
I remember reading some wirelss/3G forum posts of people who already tested this some time ago and it turns out only CDMA2000 (or WCDMA) based 3G networks are able to run VOIP (e.g.Skype) without any issues. This means that only Sprint and Verizon Wireless (and others who are CDMA based), in areas with EVDO coverage + unlimited data plans will be able to enjoy this, and most of the US is still on CDMA 2000 1X (for now, at least).
Already did that. All Ubuntu Edgy Eft - about the only thing I do not have is Skype Webcam support - my mom uses Skype since we live an ocean apart to communicate with me so it's nice to be able for her to see me. Logitech has no Linux drivers for the QuickCam Pro 5000. Other than that I have everything I am interested in running on a desktop which is virtually flawless (pretty too). For the rare occasion I need to play a game or two, I have dual booting into WinXPPro set up. I was thinking of buying Cedega, but that sounds a little dicey even though they have a lot of games working.
.... It's easier to install than Windows too :).
While I understand that keeping the legacy Windows baggage around forever is required for most companies, it isn't so for me, a home user. The change starts at home. Now if people would only try out Ubuntu and see what I'm talking about
To your point, I found Ubuntu to be the most polished Linux desktop of all. Everything I cared for, works with little effort spent on getting it to work. The only thing that disappoints me is lack of drivers for Logitech webcams (I have the quickcam pro 5000 model). Logitech does not want to write the drivers for one reason or another ("not enough demand" I suppose).
So it wasn't enough that people had to build sites like WoW detox, now we need a "Second Life Detox"?