i'm still looking for a comment here somewhere by some possible being who can acknowledge that this kid has any responsibility at all for his actions. so far he's a victim of a)the school b)the teacher c)culture (knew that was coming) d)hibachi, which is about as backward as you can get. i mean, come on. if somebody breaks the law, they have to pay the consequences. if it's a kid, they should try to correct it even more so he doesn't grow up a reprobate delinquent. severe discipline are also in order for the teacher, since what he did was stupid, and it'll teach the kid to think for himself (ie don't mindlessly do what teachers tell you to). that lesson in itself is worth the discipline if he learns his lesson from it. chances are he won't, since justice seems to be in short supply these days...
you question the legality of their action and then suggest that they "must be stopped." i fear, though your meaning is somewhat ambiguous, that you intend that the government should prevent this sort of thing. please. no government should have that much power. let freedom ring. if folks don't like it, there are alternatives. if they're too stupid to choose something different, or make something different, why should they be stopped? it's a dirty business, and it shouldn't be so hard to shame m$ into rethinking strategy, but using the power of government is dangerous, since it necessary restricts freedom.
Bei windows 2000 hingegen gibt es alle Services und Dienste aus einer Hand.
>das spart zeit und wirklich geld
this is ridiculous. in one sentence they say that everything comes out of one hand, and without explanation they claim in the next that this saves time and money. this is classic FUD. it's tantamount to the socialist answer to government (we can be more efficient if all the choices are taken away! honest!). i have yet to see an example where closing things up like this produces positive results. it's competition among the different linux distros that makes the overall linux package they present easier to use, saving the corporate buyer time in learning how to use the thing, and money in that regard, but also there's saved money just from the competition itself, for the purchased product. (i could mention that distros can also be gratis, but this isn't going to make the kind of people this ad is directed toward want it).
>Am I the only one who thinks this is not >Democratic? Well, it only goes to show that this >country is not a Democracy, but a government of >the people not by the people.
congratulations! you're right. this isn't a democracy. this is because the founding fathers had a bit of sense, and knew that a nation must have more direction than the whims of its constituents. after everybody's fought it out over the issues, there's gotta be somebody left to make the decisions. that's why we're a republic (with some democratic tendencies thrown in to prevent perversion of law and dictatorship), why is ruled by law.
thank you, machiavelli. just so long as the peons are still ABLE to conform to the prince's totalitarian standards (in commercial settings, one might abuse his primacy to force others out of the market, which is why we hate microsoft {halloween documents, pollution of IP with proprietary protocol overlay to gain control})
>the correct term is "slashbot"
creative, but not correct. the term is unused, unusable and stupid. a bot is something to get fragged by in quake, or a metal person who talks funny.
it may be that the internet itself was laid by the gvt, but it didn't stay there. it also didn't go nowhere till individuals (universities) made practical use of it. that is so barely relevant anyway. the real point is, we really really really don't need any *cough*socialist*cough* help from big brother for our open source projects. his very nature is to keep things concealed, and that dohna work too well for me. let's let em keep doing what they ought, governing. i think we can handle the software.
Net firms have not been shy about spending money, but even they can't buy into this exclusive club.
this sentence betrays the bias of the author. the simple fact is that these internet companies are notoriously unable to make as much money from their businesses as those grounded in reality. if they don't have the dough to license the content, what's the use complaining? that's what capitalism is all about; it means that sometimes there are actually going to be losers, which keeps the winners from being dragged down. i'm not saying i like television and am happy about all of this, but the IOC has the right to make its own rules. i'd rather like to see a decentralized effort to break these rules a la gnutella, but the internet companies based on providing sports content are bound by their purpose for existence. obviously THEY can't just show up with content on their sites cause IOC will be WATCHING them and jump on them as soon as they see it.
Slashdot Mirror
i'm still looking for a comment here somewhere by some possible being who can acknowledge that this kid has any responsibility at all for his actions. so far he's a victim of a)the school b)the teacher c)culture (knew that was coming) d)hibachi, which is about as backward as you can get. i mean, come on. if somebody breaks the law, they have to pay the consequences. if it's a kid, they should try to correct it even more so he doesn't grow up a reprobate delinquent. severe discipline are also in order for the teacher, since what he did was stupid, and it'll teach the kid to think for himself (ie don't mindlessly do what teachers tell you to). that lesson in itself is worth the discipline if he learns his lesson from it. chances are he won't, since justice seems to be in short supply these days...
you question the legality of their action and then suggest that they "must be stopped." i fear, though your meaning is somewhat ambiguous, that you intend that the government should prevent this sort of thing. please. no government should have that much power. let freedom ring. if folks don't like it, there are alternatives. if they're too stupid to choose something different, or make something different, why should they be stopped? it's a dirty business, and it shouldn't be so hard to shame m$ into rethinking strategy, but using the power of government is dangerous, since it necessary restricts freedom.
the first sentence there is also a quote. my finger must have hiccuped.
i prefer the strict method of translation. this is perfect accurate. you folks can decide for yourself what they mean by this.
that's why it was printed in german.
Bei windows 2000 hingegen gibt es alle Services und Dienste aus einer Hand.
>das spart zeit und wirklich geld
this is ridiculous. in one sentence they say that everything comes out of one hand, and without explanation they claim in the next that this saves time and money. this is classic FUD. it's tantamount to the socialist answer to government (we can be more efficient if all the choices are taken away! honest!). i have yet to see an example where closing things up like this produces positive results. it's competition among the different linux distros that makes the overall linux package they present easier to use, saving the corporate buyer time in learning how to use the thing, and money in that regard, but also there's saved money just from the competition itself, for the purchased product. (i could mention that distros can also be gratis, but this isn't going to make the kind of people this ad is directed toward want it).
>Am I the only one who thinks this is not
>Democratic? Well, it only goes to show that this
>country is not a Democracy, but a government of
>the people not by the people.
congratulations! you're right. this isn't a democracy. this is because the founding fathers had a bit of sense, and knew that a nation must have more direction than the whims of its constituents. after everybody's fought it out over the issues, there's gotta be somebody left to make the decisions. that's why we're a republic (with some democratic tendencies thrown in to prevent perversion of law and dictatorship), why is ruled by law.
thank you, machiavelli. just so long as the peons are still ABLE to conform to the prince's totalitarian standards (in commercial settings, one might abuse his primacy to force others out of the market, which is why we hate microsoft {halloween documents, pollution of IP with proprietary protocol overlay to gain control})
>the correct term is "slashbot"
creative, but not correct. the term is unused, unusable and stupid. a bot is something to get fragged by in quake, or a metal person who talks funny.
hear hear! that's not what they're there for.
it may be that the internet itself was laid by the gvt, but it didn't stay there. it also didn't go nowhere till individuals (universities) made practical use of it. that is so barely relevant anyway. the real point is, we really really really don't need any *cough*socialist*cough* help from big brother for our open source projects. his very nature is to keep things concealed, and that dohna work too well for me. let's let em keep doing what they ought, governing. i think we can handle the software.
um, geeks don't really do things for the sake of what people will think of it. you're new to this i guess.
Net firms have not been shy about spending money, but even they can't buy into this exclusive club. this sentence betrays the bias of the author. the simple fact is that these internet companies are notoriously unable to make as much money from their businesses as those grounded in reality. if they don't have the dough to license the content, what's the use complaining? that's what capitalism is all about; it means that sometimes there are actually going to be losers, which keeps the winners from being dragged down. i'm not saying i like television and am happy about all of this, but the IOC has the right to make its own rules. i'd rather like to see a decentralized effort to break these rules a la gnutella, but the internet companies based on providing sports content are bound by their purpose for existence. obviously THEY can't just show up with content on their sites cause IOC will be WATCHING them and jump on them as soon as they see it.