While I agree that this license is fucked up, and I think watching something I purchase is completely ligit, I must take notice of your moral positioning.
If we all took the attitude you described above, this life would not be the decent one we all have, but a chaotic mess. If I find keeping unwanted children alive immoral, does that mean I should go out and kill those children? No, and neither should we ignore any law based on morality. If we disagree, we find peaceful solution, not ramming our beliefs out like this.
Yes, but we do remember Jim Brown's raid in the 1850's. Why? Because he was stirring up something that made most people in the region upset. That being the case, I am sure Rome would have noticed and recorded a man who got a whole province all up in arms. John the baptist has documentation, but Jesus does not. Therefore, I don't see how that man could have existed.
Also, don't forget the jewish historians. One wrote in great length of the times Jesus was supposed to have lived, writing pages about the common criminal trial, yet he says nothing of Jesus. He does mention The Baptist, but not Jesus.
It's all fiction. You give me evidence of Jesus' existance in the Roman Empire's records, and I might concede he existed. There are a lot of records of that time, and none show anything about him. I could also point to the jewish historians of that era, and their absence of Jesus-- John the Baptist, yes Jesus, No.
You hit that tunnel and keep going, at full throttle, until you can fire into that little port with your torpedoes. Watch out for those bad guys and always keep yourself protected with sheilds.
The bible is just as much fiction as Star Wars (although Leia in a gold bikini is so much more fun to look at:)
Those links are supposed to take me somewhere outside of slashdot. Come on, take a little time, learn html, perhaps research, and then come back and try again.
I talked to a financial advisor about a year or so ago about getting into the stock market, portfolios, money markets, the whole thing. After talking for a few hours, he mentioned that he used to be on the radio with a sunday morning talk show on the market.
He talked about the growth of large banks and other financial institutions. I asked him if he thought they would continue to grow, and become huge global entities with fingers everywhere. He said they would. I bemoaned the fact that I would rather bank with a smaller bank and get the attention a customer should have, as opposed to a large bank where I have to pay to talk to a teller.
He said that while the large banks would be everywhere, that this would give rise to smaller community banks that would service the needs of the local populations. Those banks would be cheaper and less selective on who they let bank with them. They would be the alternatives to the large banks. He also stated that he thought the communities would gravitate more to those smaller banks for day to day needs, while going to the larger banks for longer term needs. This was his vision.
I think the same holds true for these mom and pop ISPs. I don't think they will go away. They won't be as numerous as before, but they will be there, servicing the local community they are a part of.
So, to answer your question: No. They will be there. And just as servicable. Not as numerous, but they won't disappear from the earth.
Why don't you reboot your computer into windows (we all know you have a partition for your games) and download quicktime, then you don't have to wish any more. You can see it on your own computer!
I have no gate key
The most important question is....
on
PDP-10 Revival
·
· Score: 1
Why? Why god why? I don't have the patience recompiling a linux kernel on a 486. Who would want to be on this ol dinosaur?
I guess you don't consider things like single parent families, or parents who don't get paid enough to provide a good living for their children. Or perhaps because not every man and woman out there is able to handle being a stay at home parent. You try it. Hell of a lot harder than it looks.
I can't stand conservatives who only think in terms of what they think is best for every one else. We are not all the same.
I hope this isn't true. We are arming our commercial jets with firepower more powerful than what our fighter jets use? That doesn't make any sense. Then again, when was the last time the government made any sense?
Why should an NT user switch to BSD as opposed to Linux? Sure, BSD can run most Linux binaries, but what does BSD offer in the way of applications that Linux doesn't?
This is dumb. I am left handed, and the rest of my family is right handed. How are we supposed to get along with this?
I already sacrifice enough with the mouse, the keyboard, the stick shift, the remote control, the roads, eating at restaraunts, doors, pr0n sites. This is right handed person's world, and I am sick of it.
I have tried to install BSD. I am not a newbie to unixland, having my hands on most linux distros and Solaris as well, but BSD is more frustrating to install than Debian. Many say it is not that hard, but in the handfull of times I have installed it, I have given up on the packages. This used to be a big concern for linux. Perhaps if *BSD was a bit more intuitive to install, more would use it.
I do admit that I would like to move away from linux. I want something that is a bit tighter and not so gripped with the political wars that are gripping linuxland.
I would also be far more interested in *BSD if it took a lead roll in the replacement of X. BSD is supposed to be able to act as a workhorse, managing its resources extremely well. A new lighter, faster GUI would be a perfect fit for this OS.
BeOS's install is only about 120mb. The extra space is for other shit you may want to put on, swapping, and what not. BeOS does need more driver support than what it has, but it is getting better.
As far as its viability as a desktop, I believe Be is so close. It lacks just a few things- mostly the network support and applications needed. Yes those are big things, but it has already overcome the small footprint and gui problems, as well as multimedia support.
I enjoy reading history, and I know that it continues to repeat itself, despite what most people think. It just gets larger, and bigger in scale. First the Athenians has a democracy. They had their asses handed to them. Then the Romans. Ah, the romans. They had a republic set up to avoid any rule by one- by any monarchy. Well, that republic became so corrupted that it fell. It was falling for over a century before Julius Ceasar crowned himself dictator for life.
This gets me to thinking, are we the successors of the Romans? I think so. We have rolled up most of a continent, taken many lands and placed our rule over a large amount of people. Yet the amount of people ruling seem to be slowly becoming an elite part of society (See: Kennedys and now Bushs)
I think the US will not last another 200 years. I think someone will come along and knock this nation off, or we will cease being a republic. We will cease to be the American Republic and become another entity.
Will a 3rd party slow this process? Hell yes. Will a 4th and 5th. Even more. If we had 10 parties representing the states in congress, laws would stop flowing out of that damn place at such an alarming rate. Those of the US would retain more freedoms. It would take something alarming, such as a war, or a budget crisis, to bring everyone into line, and even then it would be with much debate. Would this parrelize us in the event of war? No, the president has command over the Armed Forces, and can use them to defend the lives of citizens of the US. This would check and balance 2 of the 3 branches of the US Gov. The 3rd? The prez chooses the judges of the supreme court, and the congress votes yay or nay. With so many parties representing so many groups of people, this would lead to judges who would be quite different in views from each other and the president. Effectivly checking the other 2 branches.
Please, everyone, vote for another establishment! Another party! Especially in the senate and congressional and local elections! This will give us the diversity to survive as a Republic for many years to come!
I have been running linux for 2+ years, and I can tell you that of all the installs I have had, I can't count one that becomes as shaky and unstable after everyday use as W2k does. Our burner system at work has only existed for about 3 months, and it is teetering on a reinstall. My firewall/ fileserver at home has been running without a hitch for 8+ months- and that includes upgrades and everything on the hardware.
I'll give w2k prof props for looking good and running decent, but it ain't the end all of anything, except MS's reign on the lower end server market. Besides, why is it that my NT workstation install gets better perfomance on my laptop than does my W2k install. Because to achieve the same performance level, W2k requires MORE hardware than NT.
I'll keep with linux for what I do. It isn't everything, and is missing some things windows has (like quicktime and visio) but after seeing KDE2, start looking over your shoulder. MS has a challenger.
They asked us all kind of questions during the interview. My friend was rejected simply because he had had a simple sip of wine.
Once we were in, they hinted that we should exagerate the story we told a bit. I went once, and the kids were awed by what we said, but I don't think they believed our BS.
Is that children from past generations have experienced worse. The US of A used to force children to work 12-14 hour days in very disgusting work places. Children were given no quarter in any war fought between armies during the Middle Ages; If they were in the way-- too bad. Recent examples of children IN violence: Vietnam. Children carried explosives to GI's to kill them.
This shit is not going to stop or change anything. Why do we insist on trying to shield our children from the world? They will still find a way to see it, and when they go through that rebellious time, they will go around their parents and laws- and will embrace it. If the worst my children have to suffer through is playing a violent game on the computer, then I am fine with that.
I have been thinking about this a lot, too. I believe it is the corporations that are at fault here, and that IT should unionize, that the people coming into the country with an HB1 should be able to go work where they want to.
This is exactly why unions came about. Children and adults alike were worked into the ground, for 12-14 hours a day, without proper compensation. It wasn't until the progressives of the late 1800s and early 1900s stepped up, did things get a little better-- and that was because of the unions.
Also, I wouldn't mind the lower pay, if the cost of living wasn't so damn high. I love working with the technology, but in order for me to support my family, I have to go where the money is. That's not right.
Slashdot Mirror
If we all took the attitude you described above, this life would not be the decent one we all have, but a chaotic mess. If I find keeping unwanted children alive immoral, does that mean I should go out and kill those children? No, and neither should we ignore any law based on morality. If we disagree, we find peaceful solution, not ramming our beliefs out like this.
Now back to our scheduled programming....
uhhuh, right. Nice troll. Now try and use reason.
Also, don't forget the jewish historians. One wrote in great length of the times Jesus was supposed to have lived, writing pages about the common criminal trial, yet he says nothing of Jesus. He does mention The Baptist, but not Jesus.
It's all fiction. You give me evidence of Jesus' existance in the Roman Empire's records, and I might concede he existed. There are a lot of records of that time, and none show anything about him. I could also point to the jewish historians of that era, and their absence of Jesus-- John the Baptist, yes Jesus, No.
The bible is just as much fiction as Star Wars (although Leia in a gold bikini is so much more fun to look at :)
mmmmmmmmmm, sweeeeeet sex - Homer
He talked about the growth of large banks and other financial institutions. I asked him if he thought they would continue to grow, and become huge global entities with fingers everywhere. He said they would. I bemoaned the fact that I would rather bank with a smaller bank and get the attention a customer should have, as opposed to a large bank where I have to pay to talk to a teller.
He said that while the large banks would be everywhere, that this would give rise to smaller community banks that would service the needs of the local populations. Those banks would be cheaper and less selective on who they let bank with them. They would be the alternatives to the large banks. He also stated that he thought the communities would gravitate more to those smaller banks for day to day needs, while going to the larger banks for longer term needs. This was his vision.
I think the same holds true for these mom and pop ISPs. I don't think they will go away. They won't be as numerous as before, but they will be there, servicing the local community they are a part of.
So, to answer your question: No. They will be there. And just as servicable. Not as numerous, but they won't disappear from the earth.
press [any] key to contine...
I fart in your general direction
I have no gate key
Why? Why god why? I don't have the patience recompiling a linux kernel on a 486. Who would want to be on this ol dinosaur?
I guess you don't consider things like single parent families, or parents who don't get paid enough to provide a good living for their children. Or perhaps because not every man and woman out there is able to handle being a stay at home parent. You try it. Hell of a lot harder than it looks.
I can't stand conservatives who only think in terms of what they think is best for every one else. We are not all the same.
I hope this isn't true. We are arming our commercial jets with firepower more powerful than what our fighter jets use? That doesn't make any sense. Then again, when was the last time the government made any sense?
Why should an NT user switch to BSD as opposed to Linux? Sure, BSD can run most Linux binaries, but what does BSD offer in the way of applications that Linux doesn't?
This is dumb. I am left handed, and the rest of my family is right handed. How are we supposed to get along with this?
I already sacrifice enough with the mouse, the keyboard, the stick shift, the remote control, the roads, eating at restaraunts, doors, pr0n sites. This is right handed person's world, and I am sick of it.
LEFT HANDERS UNITE!
Buy from the Left-torium!
Try Konqueror for KDE 2.0. When the bugs in that browswer are worked out, this browser will be the best out there
I have tried to install BSD. I am not a newbie to unixland, having my hands on most linux distros and Solaris as well, but BSD is more frustrating to install than Debian. Many say it is not that hard, but in the handfull of times I have installed it, I have given up on the packages. This used to be a big concern for linux. Perhaps if *BSD was a bit more intuitive to install, more would use it.
I do admit that I would like to move away from linux. I want something that is a bit tighter and not so gripped with the political wars that are gripping linuxland.
I would also be far more interested in *BSD if it took a lead roll in the replacement of X. BSD is supposed to be able to act as a workhorse, managing its resources extremely well. A new lighter, faster GUI would be a perfect fit for this OS.
BeOS's install is only about 120mb. The extra space is for other shit you may want to put on, swapping, and what not. BeOS does need more driver support than what it has, but it is getting better.
As far as its viability as a desktop, I believe Be is so close. It lacks just a few things- mostly the network support and applications needed. Yes those are big things, but it has already overcome the small footprint and gui problems, as well as multimedia support.
And please, go to hell. If we want shit from you, we'll hit you upside your head.
Sorry. Meant this to be its own post.
I enjoy reading history, and I know that it continues to repeat itself, despite what most people think. It just gets larger, and bigger in scale. First the Athenians has a democracy. They had their asses handed to them. Then the Romans. Ah, the romans. They had a republic set up to avoid any rule by one- by any monarchy. Well, that republic became so corrupted that it fell. It was falling for over a century before Julius Ceasar crowned himself dictator for life.
This gets me to thinking, are we the successors of the Romans? I think so. We have rolled up most of a continent, taken many lands and placed our rule over a large amount of people. Yet the amount of people ruling seem to be slowly becoming an elite part of society (See: Kennedys and now Bushs)
I think the US will not last another 200 years. I think someone will come along and knock this nation off, or we will cease being a republic. We will cease to be the American Republic and become another entity.
Will a 3rd party slow this process? Hell yes. Will a 4th and 5th. Even more. If we had 10 parties representing the states in congress, laws would stop flowing out of that damn place at such an alarming rate. Those of the US would retain more freedoms. It would take something alarming, such as a war, or a budget crisis, to bring everyone into line, and even then it would be with much debate. Would this parrelize us in the event of war? No, the president has command over the Armed Forces, and can use them to defend the lives of citizens of the US. This would check and balance 2 of the 3 branches of the US Gov. The 3rd? The prez chooses the judges of the supreme court, and the congress votes yay or nay. With so many parties representing so many groups of people, this would lead to judges who would be quite different in views from each other and the president. Effectivly checking the other 2 branches.
Please, everyone, vote for another establishment! Another party! Especially in the senate and congressional and local elections! This will give us the diversity to survive as a Republic for many years to come!
Am I really a replicant?
I have been running linux for 2+ years, and I can tell you that of all the installs I have had, I can't count one that becomes as shaky and unstable after everyday use as W2k does. Our burner system at work has only existed for about 3 months, and it is teetering on a reinstall. My firewall/ fileserver at home has been running without a hitch for 8+ months- and that includes upgrades and everything on the hardware. I'll give w2k prof props for looking good and running decent, but it ain't the end all of anything, except MS's reign on the lower end server market. Besides, why is it that my NT workstation install gets better perfomance on my laptop than does my W2k install. Because to achieve the same performance level, W2k requires MORE hardware than NT. I'll keep with linux for what I do. It isn't everything, and is missing some things windows has (like quicktime and visio) but after seeing KDE2, start looking over your shoulder. MS has a challenger.
Once we were in, they hinted that we should exagerate the story we told a bit. I went once, and the kids were awed by what we said, but I don't think they believed our BS.
Is that children from past generations have experienced worse. The US of A used to force children to work 12-14 hour days in very disgusting work places. Children were given no quarter in any war fought between armies during the Middle Ages; If they were in the way-- too bad. Recent examples of children IN violence: Vietnam. Children carried explosives to GI's to kill them.
This shit is not going to stop or change anything. Why do we insist on trying to shield our children from the world? They will still find a way to see it, and when they go through that rebellious time, they will go around their parents and laws- and will embrace it. If the worst my children have to suffer through is playing a violent game on the computer, then I am fine with that.
I have been thinking about this a lot, too. I believe it is the corporations that are at fault here, and that IT should unionize, that the people coming into the country with an HB1 should be able to go work where they want to.
This is exactly why unions came about. Children and adults alike were worked into the ground, for 12-14 hours a day, without proper compensation. It wasn't until the progressives of the late 1800s and early 1900s stepped up, did things get a little better-- and that was because of the unions.
Also, I wouldn't mind the lower pay, if the cost of living wasn't so damn high. I love working with the technology, but in order for me to support my family, I have to go where the money is. That's not right.
work to live, not live to work!