IME, Wine doesn't work out of the box, but even if it did, IMO it's a cheat around practicing an OSS life. Running Wine is a surrender to the Microsoft hegemony.
Fuck off.
I am fed up with seeing this kind of self-righteous, autistic rubbish on Slashdot. Blizzard and Microsoft are two completely seperate companies; as you've already said, the game has an OSX port, and I bet you wouldn't take that stance with people running the OSX version on either a Mac *or* under Linux/FreeBSD if that were possible.
It is exactly such gloriously rational, objective individuals such as yourself that are the reason why I can almost promise you that we will *never* see a Linux port (or even an attempt at such) of WoW. Another group of such geniuses ended up in court with Blizzard over the bnetd project; that in conjunction with the amount Battlenet was being hacked even before that gave the company a siege mentality. The experience they've had with the online "community" has caused them to adopt an almost totally adversarial default view of it...and I personally don't blame them. I know the groupthink around here says that corporations are evil by definition, but Blizzard are one case where in my own opinion there has been abuse both given *and* received. Battlenet has been hacked constantly, every possible means by which any of their online applications could be subverted has been exploited, and Blizzard staff have had to deal with being inundated with vitriol on an ongoing basis by sociopathic adolescents. The plutocrats at the top of the company might be worth {m,b}illions, but there are one heck of a lot of other people in the proverbial trenches within the company who are not, and who do not deserve a lot of the shit that they have had to deal with.
I am sick of every last one of the smug, self-satisfied Marxist hypocrites that I encounter on this site on a daily basis; people who insist on continually trying to dictate how others should think, act, and live. It's also always the same tired Aspergian screed:- do not *dare* use any commercial software yourself; worship without question that autocratic sack of Stalinist vomit Richard Stallman and obey his every decree, regardless of consistency or logic; and above all, never, NEVER engage in any form of activity whatsoever that could even be remotely construed as capitalist.
I'm also sick of these same people condemning others for such pathetic things as the use of binary hardware drivers; most such people who behave as though they "own" Linux and that anyone who uses it is somehow on their turf don't in fact own jack shit. I've spoken to people who actually *do* write code for Linux before, and they virtually never have the same attitudes themselves that the armchair zealots do.
For the love of God, stop fucking trying to tell me and everyone else how we should live, and realise that by doing that you're no better than what you claim Microsoft are trying to do themselves. If we want to use FOSS, we will. If we want to use Microsoft's (or anyone else's) closed source, proprietary stuff, we will. Stop acting as though Linux is something that you own and that the rest of the population can't use it unless we adhere to your decrees...because you can't stop anyone from doing so. I realise however, that all of the other people in the Linux community who act like this *only* do because of a need to unquestioningly emulate Richard Stallman, and that he is the source of this particular sickness...that is the main reason why I have grown to passionately hate that man to the extent that I now do.
Dictating people's actions in any context is NOT promoting freedom. Mod me down, FSF cowards, like you always do. I'm aware that you don't have the courage, integrity, lucidity, or intelligence necessary to refute what I say on its' own merits, so attempting to silence me is really the only thing you *can* do.
...is that the author of TFA describes how "wondrous" SW is, while at the same time commenting on how bad the prequel scripts are/were.
I've noticed this paradox in just about every SW review I've ever read; the idea that while the general, overarching "vision," is wonderful, that Lucas' abilities with regards to some of the sub-disciplines associated with directing are somewhat less consistent.
Is it just me, or has that been a consistent message in reviews in other people's minds as well?
I wouldn't know how many times I've been modded Flamebait, Troll, or Overrated, (the latter when they were at least feeling honest) purely because I was simply expressing an opinion that went against the hive mentality of the FSF, and some of its' resident enforcers didn't want people seeing said opinion. Said cultists are also unbelievable cowards...Nothing is tolerated less by them than dissent. Great freedom there, guys.
Stallman only has any power at all because of the sorts of zombies who enforce his ideology here and in other places...he has only attained any influence at all because a lot of people hate nothing more than having to think for themselves, which is a burden he seems more than happy to relieve them of. It's a lot easier to simply swallow someone else's ideas than it is to try and come up with your own.
Pornography just isn't as big online as some people seem to think. Sure, it's there if you look for it...but for the most part, the Web gets used for other things. The ratio might be a bit higher on IRC and the p2p nets, but not actually all that much.
In terms of my own porn-viewing days, it was primarily before I got into a relationship. The other thing was that even at the time, I was aware that porn itself wasn't what I really wanted; sex was. From that point of view, porn is vicarious and frustrating. To a degree masturbation works, yes...but to nowhere near the same extent as sex itself.
Now that I'm able to have sex on a regular basis, I find that porn just isn't something I feel I need.
Blame the GNU guys for GlibC's versioning scheme if you really must complain. Blame them for the change in binutils' ABI changes in recent versions.
If there was a commonly used alternative to those two packages for Linux, you might have a point...but there isn't, to the degree that I'm assuming that the majority of uninformed people simply assume that Glibc/binutils are intractable parts of a usual Linux system. For the most part, sadly, they'd actually be right.
Linux needs an alternative to the GNU project for a lot of different reasons...the steady decomposition of the toolchain is but one of them.
Grey 1:"You mean to say they actually *eat* that shit? Thank the Central Core for our intradermal nutrient absorption...Can you imagine what *their* stuff must taste like?"
Grey 2:"Yeah. The thing I really don't understand is that on the one hand, the humans complain that a visit from *us* is traumatic, but then they subject themselves to horrible experiences like that, and find that less scary! I'm really insulted!"
Laura Didio mentioned having been issued with death threats by Linux users. I might not be able to conclusively prove it, but I'd be willing to bet money that said threats would have come primarily from the FSF/GNU side of the ideological fence. I've noticed that people who identify themselves (or are identified by others) as being on the "open source" side of said line don't tend to feel as though theirs is the only perspective with the right to exist, or that anyone who voices opposing beliefs must be silenced or shouted down at all costs.
The FSF and its' followers, on the other hand, do feel like that. I see it demonstrated on a near daily basis online. You can also read about this attitude being displayed in an interview with Bradley Kuhn that was conducted here on Slashdot. I mentioned it in a post a few days ago.
In that interview, Kuhn says that he feels that programmers/developers should not have the write to license their work via any license other than the GPL...whether it is commercial, or simply a non-GPL FOSS license.
The FSF are seeking, IMHO, to create a scenario which is just as repressive in its' own right as anything Microsoft are trying to establish.
Microsoft want to use DRM to ensure that you can't use a computer in any way other than ways in which they specify.
The FSF, on the other hand, wants to use the GPL and their activism to ensure that you can't use, write, or license software in any way other than ways in which they specify.
To achieve their ends, Microsoft use their marketing power, threats of patent lawsuits, hostile market acquisitions, economic and legal warfare, and their position as an incumbent monopoly.
To achieve their ends, the FSF uses a cult of personality centred around Richard Stallman, (and to a lesser extent, Eben Moglen and Bradley Kuhn) namecalling and vilification of individuals, threats and various forms of intimidation and fearmongering, (such as creating hype about DRM) and a rather insidious form of decentralised, mutually-reinforcing thought reform along FSF-approved lines in which critical thought is not tolerated, and whereby individuals monitor each other and enforce ideological comformity, generally via reproduction of the above methods.
I'm assuming you'll find the similarities between the two cases to ultimately be reasonably clear.
Quite amusing. Yes, I hate Microsoft just as much as you do. Utterly loath and detest those despicable bastards.
As hard as I try not to, I'm starting to hate the FSF just as much, if not more. The self-righteousness, the arrogance, and the brutal insistence on lock-step conformity with their "our way or the highway," thinking...not to mention the juvenile name-calling and vilification (and worse, in the case of Laura Didio) which anyone who opposes them is subjected to. The one way I've heard it described which really resonated with me was, "Free as in do as I say."
The response I'll no doubt get to this is a catalogue of all the terrible things Microsoft either has done in the past or wants to do in the future.
The thing is, I really feel that Stallman/Kuhn with the DRM fearmongering is a lot like how I saw George Bush on the one hand, and Sadaam Hussein and the threat of WMD on the other.
What Microsoft *might* end up doing with DRM is causing me a lot less emotional pain than how Stallman, Kuhn, and their followers *are* treating people because of their fear of it.
The other reason why I've realised that I'm no longer interested in being refuted by advocates of the FSF is because I honestly don't believe they think at all. They're a cult...and as such, me arguing with them is pointless...because nothing I say can argue with mind control, their degree of fear, or their equally irrational degree of worship for Stallman. The degree of fear is the most difficult thing to get through.
Ask yourselves this though, guys...If Stallman is as powerful as you think he is...What are you so afraid of?
I can well understand why corrupt police would dislike it when they are caught behaving like the jackbooted thugs that many of them are. It is well known how corrupt police tend to have an attitude of exceptionalism; they think that the law does not or should not apply to them, and that they should be able to get away with doing whatever they like.
I also don't know how that demoniac Barnett is able to sleep at night...I saw the footage of what they did to Rodney King myself. Makes me think that there must be some substance to some of the negative stereotypes about lawyers as well, after all.
Enjoy a taste of your own medicine, guys. Suddenly surveillance cameras watching anything and everything doesn't seem like such an attractive idea when you're the target of them, does it?
Indeed. An even greater irony is the fact that, as I commented on here, there is evidence to suggest that Stallman no longer believes that programmers should be able to make a living programming at all. So what Bradley Kuhn is really doing here is projecting.
From the perspective of those who might like to see Microsoft destroyed completely, re-opening the antitrust case would actually be counterproductive.
The reason why is because if they are allowed to continue to behave as a monopolist for a certain period of time, negative publicity resulting from their own continuing abusive and unethical actions will sink them in fairly short order. If they get broken up, while it might provide consumers with some remedy, it will also allow Microsoft to continue to exist, (albeit in a reduced form) regroup, and re-invent itself.
Let them release Vista and engage in fascist behaviour in association with it. Let them think that they are invincible, that they can treat their consumer base in whatever manner they please...and most importantly of all, let the public see exactly what a computing world truly run according to Bill Gates' vision would look like.
Public reaction and opinion, consumer advocacy groups, market forces, and the law in many other countries (if not the US itself) will then do the rest. The case does not need to be re-opened now...it is redundant.
As the mathematical proverb says:- Every problem does, indeed, have its' own solution.
Instead, Microsoft has used this patent pledge to indicate that, in their view, the only good Free Software developer is an isolated, uncompensated, unimportant Free Software developer.
This from the man who believes that the GPL is the only FOSS license with the right to exist.
Mr. Kuhn, you are every bit as much a part of the problem as Microsoft are themselves. In fact, you are moreso. At least Microsoft do not try and pretend to be anything other than what they are. You are not one micron less a fascist...merely from a different direction.
You can take your warped, cultic distortion of the word "freedom," and cram it where you feel most appropriate. You and Richard Stallman are open source's answer to David Miscavige and L. Ron. Hubbard, respectively. You are the proverbial scorpion on Linux's back.
Some who use Linux with the total inability to think for themselves may delude themselves that they need to use your brain and Stallman's in leiu of their own. I am not among such people, and I defy, reject, and repudiate both you, Stallman, and the entirely *false* freedom which the FSF stands for. You would have us reject Microsoft as our masters, only to install yourselves in their place.
You do not speak for everyone who uses open source. You most certainly do not speak for me.
...about Ballmer's intelligence if he *didn't* start thinking about selling Linux somehow at this point.
Let me put it this way; The only concrete reason anyone outside a corporation has to install Vista is for (new) games. For me anywayz, FreeBSD has pretty much everything else covered now...Seriously.
I still dual-boot XP for graphics editing and a few other things, and will for the foreseeable future...but in my own mind, Vista is for the birds. The fact that WoW works relatively easily with Wine means I will still be able to play that in the future as well.
Monopoly abuse to be sure, but it has worked for them in the past....
The only way they can do that in this case would be to destroy access to the toolchain...because without the toolchain, nobody can create new distributions.
This is where, as much as it pains me to admit it, with the GNU/Linux stuff, in a way RMS is right. The GNU project is very much the centre of gravity where Linux is concerned, because it is how Linux propogates itself.
Microsoft *could* sink Linux if it took out the FSF...but the good news there is that the FSF is very well protected by public opinion. If there is one thing Stallman genuinely *is* extremely good at, it's at least developing the appearance of holding the moral high ground. ESR was right when he wrote that Stallman has a thirst for martyrdom...Stallman recognises the power that martyrdom contains. He uses Gandhi's scorpionic tactics extremely well.
Just as the Republicans gained power in 1994 with (more-or-less) centrist candidates, and then lost it as they kept going too far to the right.
Yes, but the reason why the Republicans are so enamoured with the stereotypical shotgun-toting, genocidally racist, "Jaysus"-idolising, inbred rednecks is because they're as dumb as dog shit and totally emotively oriented. Hence, manipulating them is simplicity itself.
Truth be told however, the same is true of the proverbial green bandanna clad, weed smoking Communist Greenpeace freaks (a la our very own FSF) with their own respective beliefs that the sun shines forth from Kofi Annan's ass and that the gays and Wiccans should and will inherit the Earth. The latter group aren't in reality any more intelligent or logical than the former, and they're just as easy to cynically manipulate. I've also been accused on this site before of being a member of the latter group...hopefully that loving description of them should prove to anyone wondering that I'm most assuredly not.;-)
Like you said though, neither of these groups are the majority...the centre are, and so it's the centre's vote which matters. Although the two above groups are the single main reason why I can't bring myself to get involved in politics...because I don't feel any sympathy to either of the above groups...and there's no such thing as a centrist party. It is a quandary.
Although I'm not an expert on RICO, I find myself wondering if Microsoft aren't tiptoeing within reach of potential racketeering charges, here.
If Microsoft are planning on threatening people with suits for using their IP, they're going to have to make damn sure that said people *are* using their IP first. If they threaten a company, the company calls their bluff, and it comes out in the courtroom that said company isn't actually infringing on their patents, an astute judge might then ask some rather awkward questions.
Methinks Ballmer needs to be very, very careful. An approach of, "Nice distribution you have there. Would be a shame to see anything happen to it," could seriously legally backfire.
In short : Microsoft will like they have done many times: work close with Novell, copycat essential gear from Novell linux into Redmond Campus.
You've forgotten one minor factor:- the market. You're assuming that IT consumers are going to allow Microsoft to get away with something like this. That is highly unlikely. There are a very large number of people in the world who still see Microsoft as a problem to be solved...If Microsoft attempt to engage in predatory behaviour with Linux, the legal system in at least some jurisdictions (even if not the US itself) will come down on them like a ton of bricks before they're halfway through whatever strategy they've got.
Microsoft have already screwed up many, many times in the past, and have pushed consumer trust and patience to the limit. If they even remotely look like they are attempting to destroy Linux, their reputation will not survive. The corporation will be finished...No company or individual will ever want to trade under the name Microsoft ever again.
Because of Red Had success, those commerical boys doesn't show enough respect to us "The hard core GNU/Linux zealots"
You're assuming fanatics deserve respect. Some of us might say that that's a debatable assertion.;-)
We are Penguinistas you mindless IT barons. So you got tons software Patent's. Oh WE ARE SO SCARED, come and SUE US.
Hint:- If respect is something you want, you might also want to look at developing some maturity. Making negative generalisations about corporations, taunting them, and bragging about being a member of Linux's answer to the Mousketeers doesn't exactly make you look like an adult...or mentally stable, for that matter.
You cannot defeat us, we came after you and beat you and we take your market share pice by piece when our job finished, we raid your enterprises, we rape all your code and patents. Do what ever you do best, you cannot beat us.
*sigh*
Some of us are interested in seeing Linux become an operating system that is used by normal people. The FSF (other individuals like you) are still working on a kernel you've probably heard of, called the Hurd. Why don't you go and help them with that? It also isn't something which that portion of the population who live above ground are ever likely to hear about, either...so it's doubly perfect. You get to spend time with kindred spirits developing an operating system that works entirely according to your own liking, and the rest of us get to see Linux become mainstream, and also forget that you exist. Everyone wins.
I strongly suspect that this is a troll, but I'll bite:-
Why run one of the BSDs?
Pkgsrc/ports - package management that works. (unlike some systems for Linux which will remain nameless;)) Ports also has some other great features such as the vulnerability database, which you can use to check installed packages for security holes.
A core system which is developed in a centralised and generally more disciplined way, as opposed to Linux's more organic, chaotic modularity.
A system developed by people who don't see the UNIX heritage as a liability, and who aren't afraid to let UNIX *be* UNIX, as opposed to desperately trying to turn it into a Windows clone.
Free, open source UNIX, without the tyrannical, narcissistic scourge of Richard Stallman and his Red Army. (Praise be to God in the highest!;))
A system with a license (and culture, more importantly) that allows you to write your own extensions/improvements, fork it off, and then (wonder of wonders!) sell a completely closed source version if you wish! There's no hoarse, wild-eyed Trotskyite screaming about the supposed hell-spawned evil of daring to want to make money from your work. Vive la Capitalism, baby!
In other words, you've basically got a system which is very similar to Linux in terms of nearly all of Linux's positive characteristics, without the elements of Linux that really suck.
...that it is almost certain that American voting authorities would have no interest whatsoever in adopting measures to ensure the integrity of the electronic voting process.
Electronic voting has fairly demonstrably been adopted for the express purpose of more easily committing fraud.
Anyone who is interested in ensuring genuinely honest voting should, in my opinion, advocate a return to non-electronic paper voting, with the vote counting being performed in a completely open, monitored, and transparent manner.
I don't have much faith that it will be acknowledged let alone acted upon.
I am glad you at least have realistic expectations about what the response to this letter will likely be.
In response to some of my posts here a few days ago about George W Bush, I was called a crackpot and a raving moonbat. However I find myself wondering...What are the demoniacs inhabiting the halls of government in three countries (Australia, America, and England) going to have to do to us before we develop an appropriate sense of urgency?
What is it going to take before people acknowledge the threat that our governments are starting to pose to us? Are they going to have to literally start killing us in the streets before we take it seriously?
"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- William O. Douglas
People can call me a moonbat as much as they want...but I'd rather be a moonbat than get to the point where the figurative equivalent of moon *rise* had occured without me noticing it, to follow on from the above analogy. The hour is later than most people here are comfortable with realising.
b) Realise that you *are* unavoidably going to be subjected to a learning curve. There is no way around it, and if you try to avoid it by seeking an "easy" solution, (usually rpm based) later on it will end up turning out to be anything but. Another thing that needs to be accepted is that UNIX is not Windows. The two systems are fundamentally very different. You'll get the most out of it (Linux or the BSDs in this case) if you let UNIX *be* UNIX, rather than trying to insist that it be a Windows clone.
c) Realise that a dual boot scenario is the most realistic scenario. There are certain things which, as you've no doubt realised, can be done more easily with Windows. Gaming, CD burning/ripping and scanner use in particular are things you're going to want to keep Windows 2000 around for. There also isn't anything wrong with this, either. Ignore the GNU/FSF trolls on the one extreme, and the Windows zealots on the other. UNIX' and Windows' strengths are at opposite ends of the spectrum, for the most part...and they can complement each other extremely well if you can identify what each of them is good for, and don't try and demand that either of them do what they're not suited to.
Windows' strengths are:-
Games
Multimedia/Graphics/Audiovisual content in general
Diverse hardware support
Superficial user friendliness. You can be competent in Windows more or less straight away, but if you want to go beyond the basics, you'll have to invest as much time with it as anything else.
UNIX's strengths are:-
Anything related to software development/automation/programming (It was originally intended as a programmer's system)
Security. (It makes sense that an OS developed within a phone company would also be based around networking more or less from the ground up)
Robustness. (There has traditionally been a tradeoff between robustness and user friendliness, at least in Windows' sense of the term...when one goes up, the other tends to go down. RPM is the abomination that it is primarily due to its' degree of complexity; this I suspect is also why I've been hearing about Ubuntu having more problems recently)
Portability. (Per The UNIX Hater's Handbook, there were other early operating systems around at the time that were considered more desirable in other respects. However, UNIX was originally developed on a machine not much more powerful than a Commodore 64. Linux's ability to run on older hardware is due to it having inherited this necessary conservatism of design)
Transparency. As intimidating as you might find a command line interface initially, once you learn your way around, you'll find it incomparably faster and more accessible, especially for operations involving large numbers of files/actions. GNOME's abominable GConf is also the only equivalent I know of to Windows' registry.
Versatility. Given that UNIX was originally designed to be Windows' polar opposite in a number of ways, the fact that Linux has been able to mimic Windows as closely as it has is a testament to this characteristic. True, the hardware and multimedia support in particular aren't there yet...but give it time.
d) Get Slackware, and ignore the trolls who respond to this and say that I'm wrong for recommending Slack. If you want package management, get FreeBSD...ports is the only sane form of package management that I can recommend in good conscience. Ignore the Debian trolls who will potentially object to that as well.
Ports will go a long way towards solving this problem, although admittedly you can still have sticky situations. As far as an IM client goes, you also could have got Gaim, which doesn't need Qt AFAIK...although it does have its' own deps.
In terms of documents which use fonts...which application are we talking about?
Slashdot Mirror
IME, Wine doesn't work out of the box, but even if it did, IMO it's a cheat around practicing an OSS life. Running Wine is a surrender to the Microsoft hegemony.
Fuck off.
I am fed up with seeing this kind of self-righteous, autistic rubbish on Slashdot. Blizzard and Microsoft are two completely seperate companies; as you've already said, the game has an OSX port, and I bet you wouldn't take that stance with people running the OSX version on either a Mac *or* under Linux/FreeBSD if that were possible.
It is exactly such gloriously rational, objective individuals such as yourself that are the reason why I can almost promise you that we will *never* see a Linux port (or even an attempt at such) of WoW. Another group of such geniuses ended up in court with Blizzard over the bnetd project; that in conjunction with the amount Battlenet was being hacked even before that gave the company a siege mentality. The experience they've had with the online "community" has caused them to adopt an almost totally adversarial default view of it...and I personally don't blame them. I know the groupthink around here says that corporations are evil by definition, but Blizzard are one case where in my own opinion there has been abuse both given *and* received. Battlenet has been hacked constantly, every possible means by which any of their online applications could be subverted has been exploited, and Blizzard staff have had to deal with being inundated with vitriol on an ongoing basis by sociopathic adolescents. The plutocrats at the top of the company might be worth {m,b}illions, but there are one heck of a lot of other people in the proverbial trenches within the company who are not, and who do not deserve a lot of the shit that they have had to deal with.
I am sick of every last one of the smug, self-satisfied Marxist hypocrites that I encounter on this site on a daily basis; people who insist on continually trying to dictate how others should think, act, and live. It's also always the same tired Aspergian screed:- do not *dare* use any commercial software yourself; worship without question that autocratic sack of Stalinist vomit Richard Stallman and obey his every decree, regardless of consistency or logic; and above all, never, NEVER engage in any form of activity whatsoever that could even be remotely construed as capitalist.
I'm also sick of these same people condemning others for such pathetic things as the use of binary hardware drivers; most such people who behave as though they "own" Linux and that anyone who uses it is somehow on their turf don't in fact own jack shit. I've spoken to people who actually *do* write code for Linux before, and they virtually never have the same attitudes themselves that the armchair zealots do.
For the love of God, stop fucking trying to tell me and everyone else how we should live, and realise that by doing that you're no better than what you claim Microsoft are trying to do themselves. If we want to use FOSS, we will. If we want to use Microsoft's (or anyone else's) closed source, proprietary stuff, we will. Stop acting as though Linux is something that you own and that the rest of the population can't use it unless we adhere to your decrees...because you can't stop anyone from doing so. I realise however, that all of the other people in the Linux community who act like this *only* do because of a need to unquestioningly emulate Richard Stallman, and that he is the source of this particular sickness...that is the main reason why I have grown to passionately hate that man to the extent that I now do.
Dictating people's actions in any context is NOT promoting freedom. Mod me down, FSF cowards, like you always do. I'm aware that you don't have the courage, integrity, lucidity, or intelligence necessary to refute what I say on its' own merits, so attempting to silence me is really the only thing you *can* do.
...is that the author of TFA describes how "wondrous" SW is, while at the same time commenting on how bad the prequel scripts are/were.
I've noticed this paradox in just about every SW review I've ever read; the idea that while the general, overarching "vision," is wonderful, that Lucas' abilities with regards to some of the sub-disciplines associated with directing are somewhat less consistent.
Is it just me, or has that been a consistent message in reviews in other people's minds as well?
I agree, and it's very, very sad.
I wouldn't know how many times I've been modded Flamebait, Troll, or Overrated, (the latter when they were at least feeling honest) purely because I was simply expressing an opinion that went against the hive mentality of the FSF, and some of its' resident enforcers didn't want people seeing said opinion. Said cultists are also unbelievable cowards...Nothing is tolerated less by them than dissent. Great freedom there, guys.
Stallman only has any power at all because of the sorts of zombies who enforce his ideology here and in other places...he has only attained any influence at all because a lot of people hate nothing more than having to think for themselves, which is a burden he seems more than happy to relieve them of. It's a lot easier to simply swallow someone else's ideas than it is to try and come up with your own.
Pornography just isn't as big online as some people seem to think. Sure, it's there if you look for it...but for the most part, the Web gets used for other things. The ratio might be a bit higher on IRC and the p2p nets, but not actually all that much.
In terms of my own porn-viewing days, it was primarily before I got into a relationship. The other thing was that even at the time, I was aware that porn itself wasn't what I really wanted; sex was. From that point of view, porn is vicarious and frustrating. To a degree masturbation works, yes...but to nowhere near the same extent as sex itself.
Now that I'm able to have sex on a regular basis, I find that porn just isn't something I feel I need.
Blame the GNU guys for GlibC's versioning scheme if you really must complain. Blame them for the change in binutils' ABI changes in recent versions.
If there was a commonly used alternative to those two packages for Linux, you might have a point...but there isn't, to the degree that I'm assuming that the majority of uninformed people simply assume that Glibc/binutils are intractable parts of a usual Linux system. For the most part, sadly, they'd actually be right.
Linux needs an alternative to the GNU project for a lot of different reasons...the steady decomposition of the toolchain is but one of them.
...the conversation in a passing UFO.
Grey 1:"You mean to say they actually *eat* that shit? Thank the Central Core for our intradermal nutrient absorption...Can you imagine what *their* stuff must taste like?"
Grey 2:"Yeah. The thing I really don't understand is that on the one hand, the humans complain that a visit from *us* is traumatic, but then they subject themselves to horrible experiences like that, and find that less scary! I'm really insulted!"
...I've honestly ever seen the words "robust," and "Microsoft," in the same sentence.
Laura Didio mentioned having been issued with death threats by Linux users. I might not be able to conclusively prove it, but I'd be willing to bet money that said threats would have come primarily from the FSF/GNU side of the ideological fence. I've noticed that people who identify themselves (or are identified by others) as being on the "open source" side of said line don't tend to feel as though theirs is the only perspective with the right to exist, or that anyone who voices opposing beliefs must be silenced or shouted down at all costs.
The FSF and its' followers, on the other hand, do feel like that. I see it demonstrated on a near daily basis online. You can also read about this attitude being displayed in an interview with Bradley Kuhn that was conducted here on Slashdot. I mentioned it in a post a few days ago.
In that interview, Kuhn says that he feels that programmers/developers should not have the write to license their work via any license other than the GPL...whether it is commercial, or simply a non-GPL FOSS license.
The FSF are seeking, IMHO, to create a scenario which is just as repressive in its' own right as anything Microsoft are trying to establish.
Microsoft want to use DRM to ensure that you can't use a computer in any way other than ways in which they specify.
The FSF, on the other hand, wants to use the GPL and their activism to ensure that you can't use, write, or license software in any way other than ways in which they specify.
To achieve their ends, Microsoft use their marketing power, threats of patent lawsuits, hostile market acquisitions, economic and legal warfare, and their position as an incumbent monopoly.
To achieve their ends, the FSF uses a cult of personality centred around Richard Stallman, (and to a lesser extent, Eben Moglen and Bradley Kuhn) namecalling and vilification of individuals, threats and various forms of intimidation and fearmongering, (such as creating hype about DRM) and a rather insidious form of decentralised, mutually-reinforcing thought reform along FSF-approved lines in which critical thought is not tolerated, and whereby individuals monitor each other and enforce ideological comformity, generally via reproduction of the above methods.
I'm assuming you'll find the similarities between the two cases to ultimately be reasonably clear.
Quite amusing. Yes, I hate Microsoft just as much as you do. Utterly loath and detest those despicable bastards.
As hard as I try not to, I'm starting to hate the FSF just as much, if not more. The self-righteousness, the arrogance, and the brutal insistence on lock-step conformity with their "our way or the highway," thinking...not to mention the juvenile name-calling and vilification (and worse, in the case of Laura Didio) which anyone who opposes them is subjected to. The one way I've heard it described which really resonated with me was, "Free as in do as I say."
The response I'll no doubt get to this is a catalogue of all the terrible things Microsoft either has done in the past or wants to do in the future.
The thing is, I really feel that Stallman/Kuhn with the DRM fearmongering is a lot like how I saw George Bush on the one hand, and Sadaam Hussein and the threat of WMD on the other.
What Microsoft *might* end up doing with DRM is causing me a lot less emotional pain than how Stallman, Kuhn, and their followers *are* treating people because of their fear of it.
The other reason why I've realised that I'm no longer interested in being refuted by advocates of the FSF is because I honestly don't believe they think at all. They're a cult...and as such, me arguing with them is pointless...because nothing I say can argue with mind control, their degree of fear, or their equally irrational degree of worship for Stallman. The degree of fear is the most difficult thing to get through.
Ask yourselves this though, guys...If Stallman is as powerful as you think he is...What are you so afraid of?
I guess surveillance goes both ways.
I can well understand why corrupt police would dislike it when they are caught behaving like the jackbooted thugs that many of them are. It is well known how corrupt police tend to have an attitude of exceptionalism; they think that the law does not or should not apply to them, and that they should be able to get away with doing whatever they like.
I also don't know how that demoniac Barnett is able to sleep at night...I saw the footage of what they did to Rodney King myself. Makes me think that there must be some substance to some of the negative stereotypes about lawyers as well, after all.
Enjoy a taste of your own medicine, guys. Suddenly surveillance cameras watching anything and everything doesn't seem like such an attractive idea when you're the target of them, does it?
Indeed. An even greater irony is the fact that, as I commented on here, there is evidence to suggest that Stallman no longer believes that programmers should be able to make a living programming at all. So what Bradley Kuhn is really doing here is projecting.
From the perspective of those who might like to see Microsoft destroyed completely, re-opening the antitrust case would actually be counterproductive.
The reason why is because if they are allowed to continue to behave as a monopolist for a certain period of time, negative publicity resulting from their own continuing abusive and unethical actions will sink them in fairly short order. If they get broken up, while it might provide consumers with some remedy, it will also allow Microsoft to continue to exist, (albeit in a reduced form) regroup, and re-invent itself.
Let them release Vista and engage in fascist behaviour in association with it. Let them think that they are invincible, that they can treat their consumer base in whatever manner they please...and most importantly of all, let the public see exactly what a computing world truly run according to Bill Gates' vision would look like.
Public reaction and opinion, consumer advocacy groups, market forces, and the law in many other countries (if not the US itself) will then do the rest. The case does not need to be re-opened now...it is redundant.
As the mathematical proverb says:- Every problem does, indeed, have its' own solution.
Instead, Microsoft has used this patent pledge to indicate that, in their view, the only good Free Software developer is an isolated, uncompensated, unimportant Free Software developer.
This from the man who believes that the GPL is the only FOSS license with the right to exist.
Mr. Kuhn, you are every bit as much a part of the problem as Microsoft are themselves. In fact, you are moreso. At least Microsoft do not try and pretend to be anything other than what they are. You are not one micron less a fascist...merely from a different direction.
You can take your warped, cultic distortion of the word "freedom," and cram it where you feel most appropriate. You and Richard Stallman are open source's answer to David Miscavige and L. Ron. Hubbard, respectively. You are the proverbial scorpion on Linux's back.
Some who use Linux with the total inability to think for themselves may delude themselves that they need to use your brain and Stallman's in leiu of their own. I am not among such people, and I defy, reject, and repudiate both you, Stallman, and the entirely *false* freedom which the FSF stands for. You would have us reject Microsoft as our masters, only to install yourselves in their place.
You do not speak for everyone who uses open source. You most certainly do not speak for me.
Let me put it this way; The only concrete reason anyone outside a corporation has to install Vista is for (new) games. For me anywayz, FreeBSD has pretty much everything else covered now...Seriously.
I still dual-boot XP for graphics editing and a few other things, and will for the foreseeable future...but in my own mind, Vista is for the birds. The fact that WoW works relatively easily with Wine means I will still be able to play that in the future as well.
Monopoly abuse to be sure, but it has worked for them in the past....
The only way they can do that in this case would be to destroy access to the toolchain...because without the toolchain, nobody can create new distributions.
This is where, as much as it pains me to admit it, with the GNU/Linux stuff, in a way RMS is right. The GNU project is very much the centre of gravity where Linux is concerned, because it is how Linux propogates itself.
Microsoft *could* sink Linux if it took out the FSF...but the good news there is that the FSF is very well protected by public opinion. If there is one thing Stallman genuinely *is* extremely good at, it's at least developing the appearance of holding the moral high ground. ESR was right when he wrote that Stallman has a thirst for martyrdom...Stallman recognises the power that martyrdom contains. He uses Gandhi's scorpionic tactics extremely well.
Just as the Republicans gained power in 1994 with (more-or-less) centrist candidates, and then lost it as they kept going too far to the right.
;-)
Yes, but the reason why the Republicans are so enamoured with the stereotypical shotgun-toting, genocidally racist, "Jaysus"-idolising, inbred rednecks is because they're as dumb as dog shit and totally emotively oriented. Hence, manipulating them is simplicity itself.
Truth be told however, the same is true of the proverbial green bandanna clad, weed smoking Communist Greenpeace freaks (a la our very own FSF) with their own respective beliefs that the sun shines forth from Kofi Annan's ass and that the gays and Wiccans should and will inherit the Earth. The latter group aren't in reality any more intelligent or logical than the former, and they're just as easy to cynically manipulate. I've also been accused on this site before of being a member of the latter group...hopefully that loving description of them should prove to anyone wondering that I'm most assuredly not.
Like you said though, neither of these groups are the majority...the centre are, and so it's the centre's vote which matters. Although the two above groups are the single main reason why I can't bring myself to get involved in politics...because I don't feel any sympathy to either of the above groups...and there's no such thing as a centrist party. It is a quandary.
Although I'm not an expert on RICO, I find myself wondering if Microsoft aren't tiptoeing within reach of potential racketeering charges, here.
If Microsoft are planning on threatening people with suits for using their IP, they're going to have to make damn sure that said people *are* using their IP first. If they threaten a company, the company calls their bluff, and it comes out in the courtroom that said company isn't actually infringing on their patents, an astute judge might then ask some rather awkward questions.
Methinks Ballmer needs to be very, very careful. An approach of, "Nice distribution you have there. Would be a shame to see anything happen to it," could seriously legally backfire.
In short : Microsoft will like they have done many times: work close with Novell, copycat essential gear from Novell linux into Redmond Campus.
You've forgotten one minor factor:- the market. You're assuming that IT consumers are going to allow Microsoft to get away with something like this. That is highly unlikely. There are a very large number of people in the world who still see Microsoft as a problem to be solved...If Microsoft attempt to engage in predatory behaviour with Linux, the legal system in at least some jurisdictions (even if not the US itself) will come down on them like a ton of bricks before they're halfway through whatever strategy they've got.
Microsoft have already screwed up many, many times in the past, and have pushed consumer trust and patience to the limit. If they even remotely look like they are attempting to destroy Linux, their reputation will not survive. The corporation will be finished...No company or individual will ever want to trade under the name Microsoft ever again.
Because of Red Had success, those commerical boys doesn't show enough respect to us "The hard core GNU/Linux zealots"
;-)
You're assuming fanatics deserve respect. Some of us might say that that's a debatable assertion.
We are Penguinistas you mindless IT barons. So you got tons software Patent's. Oh WE ARE SO SCARED, come and SUE US.
Hint:- If respect is something you want, you might also want to look at developing some maturity. Making negative generalisations about corporations, taunting them, and bragging about being a member of Linux's answer to the Mousketeers doesn't exactly make you look like an adult...or mentally stable, for that matter.
You cannot defeat us, we came after you and beat you and we take your market share pice by piece when our job finished, we raid your enterprises, we rape all your code and patents. Do what ever you do best, you cannot beat us.
*sigh*
Some of us are interested in seeing Linux become an operating system that is used by normal people. The FSF (other individuals like you) are still working on a kernel you've probably heard of, called the Hurd. Why don't you go and help them with that? It also isn't something which that portion of the population who live above ground are ever likely to hear about, either...so it's doubly perfect. You get to spend time with kindred spirits developing an operating system that works entirely according to your own liking, and the rest of us get to see Linux become mainstream, and also forget that you exist. Everyone wins.
Even fucking Mexico can have a peaceful hand over of power despite having a disputed election.
Read about what's been happening in Oaxaca recently? Looks like that handover wasn't as peaceful as you think.
Why run one of the BSDs?
In other words, you've basically got a system which is very similar to Linux in terms of nearly all of Linux's positive characteristics, without the elements of Linux that really suck.
...that it is almost certain that American voting authorities would have no interest whatsoever in adopting measures to ensure the integrity of the electronic voting process.
Electronic voting has fairly demonstrably been adopted for the express purpose of more easily committing fraud.
Anyone who is interested in ensuring genuinely honest voting should, in my opinion, advocate a return to non-electronic paper voting, with the vote counting being performed in a completely open, monitored, and transparent manner.
I don't have much faith that it will be acknowledged let alone acted upon.
I am glad you at least have realistic expectations about what the response to this letter will likely be.
In response to some of my posts here a few days ago about George W Bush, I was called a crackpot and a raving moonbat. However I find myself wondering...What are the demoniacs inhabiting the halls of government in three countries (Australia, America, and England) going to have to do to us before we develop an appropriate sense of urgency?
What is it going to take before people acknowledge the threat that our governments are starting to pose to us? Are they going to have to literally start killing us in the streets before we take it seriously?
"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."
-- William O. Douglas
People can call me a moonbat as much as they want...but I'd rather be a moonbat than get to the point where the figurative equivalent of moon *rise* had occured without me noticing it, to follow on from the above analogy. The hour is later than most people here are comfortable with realising.
Because he has some cool ideas. Sure, they might have zero practicality or association with the real world...but they're still cool. ;)
b) Realise that you *are* unavoidably going to be subjected to a learning curve. There is no way around it, and if you try to avoid it by seeking an "easy" solution, (usually rpm based) later on it will end up turning out to be anything but. Another thing that needs to be accepted is that UNIX is not Windows. The two systems are fundamentally very different. You'll get the most out of it (Linux or the BSDs in this case) if you let UNIX *be* UNIX, rather than trying to insist that it be a Windows clone.
c) Realise that a dual boot scenario is the most realistic scenario. There are certain things which, as you've no doubt realised, can be done more easily with Windows. Gaming, CD burning/ripping and scanner use in particular are things you're going to want to keep Windows 2000 around for. There also isn't anything wrong with this, either. Ignore the GNU/FSF trolls on the one extreme, and the Windows zealots on the other. UNIX' and Windows' strengths are at opposite ends of the spectrum, for the most part...and they can complement each other extremely well if you can identify what each of them is good for, and don't try and demand that either of them do what they're not suited to.
Windows' strengths are:-
UNIX's strengths are:-
d) Get Slackware, and ignore the trolls who respond to this and say that I'm wrong for recommending Slack. If you want package management, get FreeBSD...ports is the only sane form of package management that I can recommend in good conscience. Ignore the Debian trolls who will potentially object to that as well.
e) For dialup ppp, you can use WvDial.
Insane software installs.
Ports will go a long way towards solving this problem, although admittedly you can still have sticky situations. As far as an IM client goes, you also could have got Gaim, which doesn't need Qt AFAIK...although it does have its' own deps.
In terms of documents which use fonts...which application are we talking about?