A utility company being paid to deliver water to the tap is one thing, but an entire business model based on people's laziness to download the OS and on selling them tech. support contracts?
I'm not an Ayn Rand zombie but I think she pegged this part of human nature correctly. People love collectivist schemes in large part because at some level they believe they're the ones who are going to profit at someone else's expense.
Is your company going to buy 150 Red Hat boxes for 150 workstations? No, but there's this idea that somebody is going to pick up the tab, out of altruism or cluelessness. Lots of people seem to think Eazel is going to make money by charging for their hard drive space service. Is there a single person out there who intends to pay for it himself?
One of these days I'd like to see a Slashdot article where people feel that the topic under sdiscussion is the appropriate level for censorship. Every round argues some new permutation of "It's somebody else's responsibility." When the government want to pass legislation, it should be done voluntarily. When ISP's try to filter, it should be the customer's responsibility. When the customers want to implemement filters, Jamie appears with another round of "Well, here is a list of x sites that got through the filter so obviously software solutions are impossible and unethical. Anyway, it's the responsibility of the parents." And then when parents, communities or religious organizations present their views of morality, they get blasted for not being up to our 1337 standards of cyberpunkitude.
I swear -- someday there's going to be a story about somebody who is resisting compulsory intravenous Ethernet infusion of porn and everybody will be saying, "He has no right! It's his immune system's responsibility!"
By the way, all the posts arguing that the Catholic Church is bad are missing the point. The point is that this is precisely what exercise of responsibility ought to be if we're going to avoid legislation.
At the state-funded Valley Pathways online school based in Palmer, Alaska, roughly 300 students take one to six courses a semester on the Web.
Roblimo? Wouldn't a group of these students make a terrific Slashdot interview? I'd love to hear how well this does and doesn't work and what tech they'd need to make it more usable. Even if they're not pudgy or strange.
By the way, the comment about the risk of increased paste eating made my laugh so hard an Altoid flew into my sinus. Ouch.
I'm not saying it's a good or bad idea -- just that there is no legal argument being made to support it, in contrast to what many people here seem to think.
Hard to believe I'm defending Garrison Keillor*, Letty Pogrebin and Patricia Schroeder** but -- I don't think they're saying that there is anything illegal here, whether it's Amazon or the local used book store. In fact, Amazon has offered out-of-print used books since day one.
The concern is that if a megastore like Amazon, B&N or Borders aggressively pushes used books, it has the potential to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. In other words, that in the long run it will kill off writing and publishing and everyone -- authors, publishers, bookstores, readers and Jeff Bezos -- will be worse off for it.
* Every time I see Garrison Keillor's fat, smug face I'm reminded of Homer Simpson pounding the television and shouting, "Come on! Be funny!"
** Patricia Schroeder is a media darling and was always depicted as one of the leading lights of Congress. I was amazed when I saw her on Politically Incorrect with Steve Largent and John Waters. She is a complete freaking moron. Glazed empty eyes with no visible thought process and nothing to say except the most generic feminist party line pablum.
Aduva provides at present free of charge access to the ADUVA Server and to the
ADUVA KNOWLEDGE BASE. Aduva may charge in the future for access to the ADUVA
Server and/or the ADUVA KNOWLEDGE BASE.
Is this different from the policies for the Eazel and Helix Code updaters? They're planning to eventually charge for use of their databases as well. (Hint: That's how they might conceivably make money.)
The real question is whether the Aduva source will be released -- and according to the license page it will be, under the GPL.
While I'm not thinking Q. Do you use any drugs? A. No. is going to win Slashdot any Pulitzers, here's a vaguely related question.
A recent study in Seattle showed that a comprehensive teen anti-smoking campaign had no efect on teenage smoking. For me, having watched the "War On Smoking" of recent years coincide with an increase in teen smoking, I was surprised it didn't go up. How do high school students react to the various anti-smoking campaigns? (Outrageous distortions from TheTruth.com, Philip Morris telling kids that smoking is very cool but is only for grownups...)
I don't think the Linux community should reject anyone who doesn't appreciate the advantage of a command line
I'm not advocating rejecting anyone. On the contrary, if you read down a bit you'll see that I offered some suggestions for getting up on the learning curve.
My point was that the questioner seems to be saying something I've heard a lot of new Linux users say. "OK, I've installed Linux and now I'm looking at what seems to be a clunky knockoff of Windows. Everyone says Linux is so great. What am I missing?" The reality is that Linux is not a better Windows than Windows, the way MacOS arguably is. (Or Windows is a worse MacOS than MacOS. Whatever.) By all means, learn to use what the different desktops have to offer but don't expect to have your socks blown off by anything you encounter at that stage.
Everyone's always talking about how easy Linux is to use, and how much better it is. But then why can't I find a simple tutorial explaining the basics to me from a perspective I and other Windows users can understand?
Because it's not true. The real advantages of Linux over Windows -- the command-line, the ability to look under the hood and the fact that every action and byte on your system is ultimately under your control - aren't things that can be explained to you. You'll have to play around a while before the light goes on.
That said, the best thing to do is probably to buy a book. There are a bunch of desktop- or distribution- specific bookls that sound like they're written from the perspective you want.
KDE, by the way, does have the sort of general documentation you want. Select "Help" from the K menu or type khelpcenter & at a command prompt. IIRC, Gnome has similar documents.
If the man who had first created the wheel refused to let other people use it or know of it, or if all the farmers of so many cultures refused to let their fellow farmers not know their discoveries and techniques, humanity as a civilization would have been nowhere today.
Had patents existed then, the man who invented the wheel would have cashed in big for a few years until the rights passed into the public domain. At worst, transportation technology would have been set back 14 years and dot-com millionaires would have traded in their '89 Gremlins for '98 DeLoreans. (Car nuts, please don't flame any anachronisms.) And we'd have had 14 more blessedly SUV-free years. At best, the wheel would have passed into common usage far ealier and we'd have hovercars today.
See, the point of patents is that they remove the incentive to keep knowledge secret. The inventor receives a short-term monopoly in exchange for making the knowledge public.
If farmers are being barred from growing existing crops because of new patents, I would consider that appalling and disgraceful.
Now convince me that such a thing exists.
I've read assertions like that before and a web search turns up more. But can you show me anything convincing that it's true? There is a patent on a disease resistance gene in Arabica, and fungicides or new variants based on that gene could be included under its protection. But telling farmers "We've patented your plant. Pay us to keep growing it?" I'm not convinced.
There are issues like when a company identifies a therapeutic compound from a plant grown in a foreign country. How do you sort out the conflicting claims of the country to which the plant is native, the culture which told the researchers their knowledge of which plants are valuable for health and the drug company that sorted through thousands of candidates, identified promising ones, isolated the active agent, created a less toxic and more effective variant and paid for the clinical trials? That's a tough question but it shouldn't be mixed up in what strikes me as FUD about telling the people they can no longer use the plant to treat their ulcers.
By the way, as I spend yet another Christmas Day in the lab, I invite all the people who are going to be yapping at me about how my work belongs to humanity and how I should be content with whatever bone they condescend to throw me to come over and run a few gels so I can eat lunch.
The move, backed by major entertainment industry, it has been suggested, smoothes the way for the acceptance of cryptographically-signed secure audio discs and other media content in the future.
It's not clear to me though that "it has been suggested" and "smoothes the way" mean that such plans exist or are technically feasible.
I mean, if you have a hard drive that has reserved some space in order to implement copy protection on data that has been specifically identified as copy-protected, how will this possibly affect any other data that isn't specifically encoded as copy-protected?
As somebody who doesn't buy into the idea of a moral right to warez, I'm trying to decide whether and how much I should get excited about this. So far I've come up with:
1) It's going to be a huge hassle for OS makers to support. They're going to be set back months.
2) Any new level of complexity is going to introduce new bugs.
3) Norton Utilities and similar tools are going to be severely handicapped.
But beyond that, exactly what is going to happen that is going to get in the way of any legitimate action I might take? I don't think this is going to stop me from ripping CDs. My impression is that people are flipping out more because better copy protection opens the door to increased pay-per-use and such. Not that I'm thrilled about that but until your hard drive starts sending off reports about your misbehavior, I think Alan Cox's comment , "Welcome to the United Police State Of America." is an offensive exaggeration. (A lot of people really do live in police states, you know, and they suffer much worse indignities than not being able to play DVDs from a different region.) And I thought ext2 didn't need defragmenting?
...and we spent all day staring down the throat of an 18 inch deep particle accelerator because flat displays were really expensive. Hey, at the time no one imagined it could lower your sperm count!
So there's an Ask Slashdot article where someone asks for an alternative to requiring.doc format files. Everyone argues whether the answer is to force users to write in TeX or to force them to write in XML. I make the point that if you want to read documents generated by Word users, ordering them to start using LyX or Star Office instead is unlikely to accomplish anything. That's languishing at +2, with a helpful comment that "They're obviously a bunch of idiots to start with, if they're using Word as a standard, so who cares if everything grinds to a halt! The world will be a better place."
But when I write a post with a couple of links to choice articles on the same site as the Slashdot link, that gets a +5! Got to love moderation!
IMHO, most of the responses here are galactically missing the point. The question is (or, at least, should be) "What is a format we can move to that everyone can read?" and not "What text editor and markup language should we force everyone to start writing in?"
All the posts arguing for TeX, DocBook, XML, Star Office or Pathetic Writer are forgetting that a group that demands submissions in.doc format is obviously receiving them from people using Word and turning them over to other people using Word. Forcing everyone to use LaTeX or XML (or to write LaTeX or XML in Word) is a guarantee that the whole thing will grind to a halt.
HTML is an option; XML is not until Microsoft adds it as a "Save As" option.
Until then, I use NS 4.x and curse and curse and curse, simply because there are no viable alternatives. It's awful.
Is it really that bad?
I've used NS 4.x on Linux for years, and I've never found it to be nearly as horrible as everyone says, especially in the last 18 months. I can't even remember the last time I had to rm ~/.netscape/lock. Maybe my current system (LinuxPPC 1999) has a particularly stable build or is missing some conflict?
Now 4.x on the Mac - that's a different story. If IE 5 didn't fall over so often (the Dilbert page or the Ars Technica forum will knock it over every time), I couldn't ask for anything more. It even has the site-specific cookie policy thatmade me fall in love with konqueror.
As the year 2000 limps to a close, the days when Slashdot's name was at the tip of every tech pundit's tongue, and Linux's rise to world domination seemed a foregone conclusion, are suddenly long gone. The prominence of free software in the tech and financial press has sharply declined. I mean, you know the buzz is fading fast when media outlets become so bored that they can't even muster the energy to harp on the declining stock prices of Linux companies. Sure, the dot-com downturn is responsible for a lot of the deflation, as is the normal news cycle that treats yesterday's news as, well, yesterday's news, but was it really only a year ago that VA Linux was breaking all records for IPO debuts?
Linux as an adventure is coming to an end. That doesn't mean things won't continue to get better and better but the excitement of the last few years is gone. You can feel it on the web sites - Slashdot is shrinking back to its pre-post--Columbine size, except for flamebait articles about the election and such, and discussion areas on other sites (advogato, Linux Today) are empty.
Partly it's that the rush of new people juming aboard has slowed. You can only have the same "Oh yeah? Well, according to RMS, ESR says the GPL..." discussion so many times.
And there's nothing really new around the corner. Since I've been using Linux, there's always been some exciting new development to look forward to. Either software (KDE, the 2.0 kernel, glibc, Mozilla, Gnome) or political (IPO's, 'letters', squabbling egomaniacs). Now Gnome is running stably, KDE 2.0 is out, Mozilla and the 2.4 kernel will slink in the door like teenagers out after curfew. At least for me, the only thing I'm eager to see is Evolution. (Nautilus? Yawn.)
Basically, the 'world domination' stuff is over. Linux has settled into its niche - a major chunk of the server market and a desktop share that's too small to support boxed Quake releases or a commercial office suite.
Now if that doesn't get Slashdot some more page views...;-)
I've always had a hard time deciding what desktop I liked best, because half of the applications I wanted was Gnome apps and the other half was KDE apps - those times may well be gone now (if I were to choose to use KDE2).
People keep saying stuff like that -- choosing a desktop isn't like choosing a religion. Use the desktop you like best as a desktop, be it Gnome, KDE or neither, and whichever apps you want. Nobody will arrest you for using kmail and konqueror in Gnome, or xchat and grip in KDE. The only limiting factor is hard drive space, and to some extent RAM.
Remember Miguel De Icaza recently talked about getting more "reuseablility/code-reuse" under Unix (I know that is badly written, but you know what I mean!) - well it seems that the KDE-Team was listening.
Despite what you read on Slashdot, the notion of object models in Unix didn't originate with Miguel's speech. NeXT had a terrific implementation in the '80's and the predecessor of KParts (I forget the name) precedes Gnome.
While the skedged solution works, there are some unmentioned and ugly details.
Skedged? I've never heard that before and it's not in the Jargon file. What does it mean?
Although, given the line "Those advantages are unvaluable for a lightweight and tightly integrated office suite like KOffice."it may just be another bit of KDEse.
Now that Napster is a true business entity, do they have responsibilities to regulate the music that is shared? Is the technology to stop this even available? If so, where do they draw the line?" Answers: "not really," "not really" and "wherever they want."
Actually, the answers would be: "They have the responsibility to do what they think is right," "Can they build a Nazi music detector? No. Can they filter certain files i.e. "stop this" in the sense any reasonable person would recognize? Of course." and "wherever they want."
On the plus side, one sensible thought in three represents an all-time high for Your Rights Online. And kudos to Jamie for ordering the commas and quotation marks correctly! Could you give Rob some pointers on its versus it's?
It's hard to be more reactionary than this. Months used to reflect the lunar cycle. (Why do you think we have months, and a seven day week that doesn't evenly divide into our current months?) The missing day screws things up, though, which is where leap years come in. (Flansburg is a few thousand years behind the curve here.) You can let the calendar drift (Islamic religious calendar), add leap months every other year or so, even after abandoning the 28 day month (Jewish), or use a calendar that works effectively given a simple rhyme about month lengths and a simple rule about leap years.
Incidentally, when the metric system was introduced after the French revolution, they tried to implement decimal time as well. It failed because of religious objections, and didn't catch on until Battlestar Galactica.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not an Ayn Rand zombie but I think she pegged this part of human nature correctly. People love collectivist schemes in large part because at some level they believe they're the ones who are going to profit at someone else's expense.
Is your company going to buy 150 Red Hat boxes for 150 workstations? No, but there's this idea that somebody is going to pick up the tab, out of altruism or cluelessness. Lots of people seem to think Eazel is going to make money by charging for their hard drive space service. Is there a single person out there who intends to pay for it himself?
I swear -- someday there's going to be a story about somebody who is resisting compulsory intravenous Ethernet infusion of porn and everybody will be saying, "He has no right! It's his immune system's responsibility!"
By the way, all the posts arguing that the Catholic Church is bad are missing the point. The point is that this is precisely what exercise of responsibility ought to be if we're going to avoid legislation.
Roblimo? Wouldn't a group of these students make a terrific Slashdot interview? I'd love to hear how well this does and doesn't work and what tech they'd need to make it more usable. Even if they're not pudgy or strange.
By the way, the comment about the risk of increased paste eating made my laugh so hard an Altoid flew into my sinus. Ouch.
I'm not saying it's a good or bad idea -- just that there is no legal argument being made to support it, in contrast to what many people here seem to think.
The concern is that if a megastore like Amazon, B&N or Borders aggressively pushes used books, it has the potential to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. In other words, that in the long run it will kill off writing and publishing and everyone -- authors, publishers, bookstores, readers and Jeff Bezos -- will be worse off for it.
* Every time I see Garrison Keillor's fat, smug face I'm reminded of Homer Simpson pounding the television and shouting, "Come on! Be funny!"
** Patricia Schroeder is a media darling and was always depicted as one of the leading lights of Congress. I was amazed when I saw her on Politically Incorrect with Steve Largent and John Waters. She is a complete freaking moron. Glazed empty eyes with no visible thought process and nothing to say except the most generic feminist party line pablum.
Is this different from the policies for the Eazel and Helix Code updaters? They're planning to eventually charge for use of their databases as well. (Hint: That's how they might conceivably make money.)
The real question is whether the Aduva source will be released -- and according to the license page it will be, under the GPL.
A recent study in Seattle showed that a comprehensive teen anti-smoking campaign had no efect on teenage smoking. For me, having watched the "War On Smoking" of recent years coincide with an increase in teen smoking, I was surprised it didn't go up. How do high school students react to the various anti-smoking campaigns? (Outrageous distortions from TheTruth.com, Philip Morris telling kids that smoking is very cool but is only for grownups...)
I'm not advocating rejecting anyone. On the contrary, if you read down a bit you'll see that I offered some suggestions for getting up on the learning curve.
My point was that the questioner seems to be saying something I've heard a lot of new Linux users say. "OK, I've installed Linux and now I'm looking at what seems to be a clunky knockoff of Windows. Everyone says Linux is so great. What am I missing?" The reality is that Linux is not a better Windows than Windows, the way MacOS arguably is. (Or Windows is a worse MacOS than MacOS. Whatever.) By all means, learn to use what the different desktops have to offer but don't expect to have your socks blown off by anything you encounter at that stage.
Because it's not true. The real advantages of Linux over Windows -- the command-line, the ability to look under the hood and the fact that every action and byte on your system is ultimately under your control - aren't things that can be explained to you. You'll have to play around a while before the light goes on.
That said, the best thing to do is probably to buy a book. There are a bunch of desktop- or distribution- specific bookls that sound like they're written from the perspective you want.
KDE, by the way, does have the sort of general documentation you want. Select "Help" from the K menu or type khelpcenter & at a command prompt. IIRC, Gnome has similar documents.
So you're writing it yourself, huh? No? Then you have nothing to complain about.
Sure, but in those four hours a Winblows user has to reboot an average of 36,211 times.
Sniff, sniff. Smells like another MICRO$HIT A$troturfer to me! Don't these M$ employees have anything better to do?
Download the latest Mozilla nightly. It's _much_ more power efficient than the previous nightly.
The Transmeta chip would give you all the time you need except the laptop makers are all too stupid to use them properly.
Or you could get a PowerBook and get EIGHT hours.
Had patents existed then, the man who invented the wheel would have cashed in big for a few years until the rights passed into the public domain. At worst, transportation technology would have been set back 14 years and dot-com millionaires would have traded in their '89 Gremlins for '98 DeLoreans. (Car nuts, please don't flame any anachronisms.) And we'd have had 14 more blessedly SUV-free years. At best, the wheel would have passed into common usage far ealier and we'd have hovercars today.
See, the point of patents is that they remove the incentive to keep knowledge secret. The inventor receives a short-term monopoly in exchange for making the knowledge public.
Now convince me that such a thing exists.
I've read assertions like that before and a web search turns up more. But can you show me anything convincing that it's true? There is a patent on a disease resistance gene in Arabica, and fungicides or new variants based on that gene could be included under its protection. But telling farmers "We've patented your plant. Pay us to keep growing it?" I'm not convinced.
There are issues like when a company identifies a therapeutic compound from a plant grown in a foreign country. How do you sort out the conflicting claims of the country to which the plant is native, the culture which told the researchers their knowledge of which plants are valuable for health and the drug company that sorted through thousands of candidates, identified promising ones, isolated the active agent, created a less toxic and more effective variant and paid for the clinical trials? That's a tough question but it shouldn't be mixed up in what strikes me as FUD about telling the people they can no longer use the plant to treat their ulcers.
By the way, as I spend yet another Christmas Day in the lab, I invite all the people who are going to be yapping at me about how my work belongs to humanity and how I should be content with whatever bone they condescend to throw me to come over and run a few gels so I can eat lunch.
The move, backed by major entertainment industry, it has been suggested, smoothes the way for the acceptance of cryptographically-signed secure audio discs and other media content in the future.
It's not clear to me though that "it has been suggested" and "smoothes the way" mean that such plans exist or are technically feasible.
As somebody who doesn't buy into the idea of a moral right to warez, I'm trying to decide whether and how much I should get excited about this. So far I've come up with:
1) It's going to be a huge hassle for OS makers to support. They're going to be set back months.
2) Any new level of complexity is going to introduce new bugs.
3) Norton Utilities and similar tools are going to be severely handicapped.
But beyond that, exactly what is going to happen that is going to get in the way of any legitimate action I might take? I don't think this is going to stop me from ripping CDs. My impression is that people are flipping out more because better copy protection opens the door to increased pay-per-use and such. Not that I'm thrilled about that but until your hard drive starts sending off reports about your misbehavior, I think Alan Cox's comment , "Welcome to the United Police State Of America." is an offensive exaggeration. (A lot of people really do live in police states, you know, and they suffer much worse indignities than not being able to play DVDs from a different region.) And I thought ext2 didn't need defragmenting?
...and we spent all day staring down the throat of an 18 inch deep particle accelerator because flat displays were really expensive. Hey, at the time no one imagined it could lower your sperm count!
But when I write a post with a couple of links to choice articles on the same site as the Slashdot link, that gets a +5! Got to love moderation!
I like BBspot, but this isn't one of their better efforts. (A nice bit of Slashdot-link-whoring, though.) My picks are Hour Lost Explaining Computer Terms To Mom and Linux Developer Gets Laid.
All the posts arguing for TeX, DocBook, XML, Star Office or Pathetic Writer are forgetting that a group that demands submissions in .doc format is obviously receiving them from people using Word and turning them over to other people using Word. Forcing everyone to use LaTeX or XML (or to write LaTeX or XML in Word) is a guarantee that the whole thing will grind to a halt.
HTML is an option; XML is not until Microsoft adds it as a "Save As" option.
Is it really that bad?
I've used NS 4.x on Linux for years, and I've never found it to be nearly as horrible as everyone says, especially in the last 18 months. I can't even remember the last time I had to rm ~/.netscape/lock. Maybe my current system (LinuxPPC 1999) has a particularly stable build or is missing some conflict?
Now 4.x on the Mac - that's a different story. If IE 5 didn't fall over so often (the Dilbert page or the Ars Technica forum will knock it over every time), I couldn't ask for anything more. It even has the site-specific cookie policy thatmade me fall in love with konqueror.
As the year 2000 limps to a close, the days when Slashdot's name was at the tip of every tech pundit's tongue, and Linux's rise to world domination seemed a foregone conclusion, are suddenly long gone. The prominence of free software in the tech and financial press has sharply declined. I mean, you know the buzz is fading fast when media outlets become so bored that they can't even muster the energy to harp on the declining stock prices of Linux companies. Sure, the dot-com downturn is responsible for a lot of the deflation, as is the normal news cycle that treats yesterday's news as, well, yesterday's news, but was it really only a year ago that VA Linux was breaking all records for IPO debuts?
Linux as an adventure is coming to an end. That doesn't mean things won't continue to get better and better but the excitement of the last few years is gone. You can feel it on the web sites - Slashdot is shrinking back to its pre-post--Columbine size, except for flamebait articles about the election and such, and discussion areas on other sites (advogato, Linux Today) are empty.
Partly it's that the rush of new people juming aboard has slowed. You can only have the same "Oh yeah? Well, according to RMS, ESR says the GPL..." discussion so many times.
And there's nothing really new around the corner. Since I've been using Linux, there's always been some exciting new development to look forward to. Either software (KDE, the 2.0 kernel, glibc, Mozilla, Gnome) or political (IPO's, 'letters', squabbling egomaniacs). Now Gnome is running stably, KDE 2.0 is out, Mozilla and the 2.4 kernel will slink in the door like teenagers out after curfew. At least for me, the only thing I'm eager to see is Evolution. (Nautilus? Yawn.)
Basically, the 'world domination' stuff is over. Linux has settled into its niche - a major chunk of the server market and a desktop share that's too small to support boxed Quake releases or a commercial office suite.
Now if that doesn't get Slashdot some more page views... ;-)
People keep saying stuff like that -- choosing a desktop isn't like choosing a religion. Use the desktop you like best as a desktop, be it Gnome, KDE or neither, and whichever apps you want. Nobody will arrest you for using kmail and konqueror in Gnome, or xchat and grip in KDE. The only limiting factor is hard drive space, and to some extent RAM.
Remember Miguel De Icaza recently talked about getting more "reuseablility/code-reuse" under Unix (I know that is badly written, but you know what I mean!) - well it seems that the KDE-Team was listening.
Despite what you read on Slashdot, the notion of object models in Unix didn't originate with Miguel's speech. NeXT had a terrific implementation in the '80's and the predecessor of KParts (I forget the name) precedes Gnome.
While the skedged solution works, there are some unmentioned and ugly details.
Skedged? I've never heard that before and it's not in the Jargon file. What does it mean?
Although, given the line "Those advantages are unvaluable for a lightweight and tightly integrated office suite like KOffice."it may just be another bit of KDEse.
Actually, the answers would be: "They have the responsibility to do what they think is right," "Can they build a Nazi music detector? No. Can they filter certain files i.e. "stop this" in the sense any reasonable person would recognize? Of course." and "wherever they want."
On the plus side, one sensible thought in three represents an all-time high for Your Rights Online. And kudos to Jamie for ordering the commas and quotation marks correctly! Could you give Rob some pointers on its versus it's?
Incidentally, when the metric system was introduced after the French revolution, they tried to implement decimal time as well. It failed because of religious objections, and didn't catch on until Battlestar Galactica.
I'll take the opportunity to plug my KDE Jewish calendar software here.
Let's try this again: a short debunking of the myth and a scholarly article in Transportation Quarterly.
They preview fine -- let's see what happens.