Since when is knowing if the next iPod mini will have a colour screen any of the public's business?
Since when is knowing if the next iPod mini will have a colour screen not the public's business?
and you think males in any other feild are any different? Or women for that matter?
Reality check here, most people are still living in "the 50's". Racism, sexism, outright idiocy and hatred are rampant, nevermind the intellectual racist-hatred-swill that the widespread moral relativism allows.
Lameness Filter encountered: What the fuck is a junk character?? BR tag? I'll have to agree; banks are bad business; I personally use a credit union and I find that it errs more on the side of the people than of profit(what profits it does make it distributes to it's employees, managers, and the community...not perfect but the best I've seen for a financial institution).
To "not lend your strength to that you wish to be free from"
To first survive as an induvidual.
To second know yourself and your surroundings.
To third become a seeker, and to find others as yourself and to find equilibreum of benifit between yourselves
To fourthly form groups, bubbles, of varying purpose and social structure, or astructure, observe and aid in their evolution and their accomplishment
To at all times consider the whole. To at all times learn the truth, and speak the truth to yourself. To at all times speak the truth to your peers within your groups, and to speak the truth incognito in the real, in effect expressing and becoming articulate in both thought and words.
To run contrary to false notions and false methods deemed harmful enough to do so when the chance permits, and you're feeling strong enough, and to love one's family if necessary.
To bootstrap.
To mind aristotle's moderation as virtue, in moderation.
To not waste when possible, and when you must waste waste efficiently. Keep efficiency in mind and don't be afraid to jump and overcome efficiency when the next virtue avails itself.
But become a part of a bubble within the sea of violence. Your bubble may be popped. But whether or not you find success if enough like-minded bubbles are formed the nature of the substance itself changes.
awareness of poverty+association with poverty+the tools to change==change
If enough of us can manage to survive, and continue to be aware of our initial goals, bootstrapping each other we can overturn the common practices; not necessarily become orderers ourselves, but just change the mentality, the way of doing...the way...change...the way.
And to mind that while your methods may be alive, should the components of your methods be people, they too are alive.
The kind of revolution most people think about is outdated. A revolution can only win given two things; a people truly aware and understanding of themselves, their oponent and the nature of the change which must take place. This understanding is not something you can just pick up from textbooks or learn, it's something that has to come from people not unlike us striving and actively persuing smaller goals in union, with intent of revolution. Smaller accomplishments create momentum and positive reinforcement. Small accomplishments in industry production suggested the virtue of division of labour to Adam Smith. We must keep that in mind.
The revolution will not be won with military might; in fact if it is won purely on this ground the result will be worse than the beginning; a taliban style religious junta is likely.
My solution? To attempt a partail solution, over a limited range, and to expand among the willing.
My solution? You email me at themusicgod1@jabberwocky.hn.org
and we can exchange ideas, and perhaps help each other if our skillset union permits.
If the country cannot provide basic welfare and to secure it's citizens from being made slaves and victims of, it must be overthrown or conquored, or simply ignored as another country takes its place.
But when you have no way of staying alive except digging yourself deeper and deeper into debt,
This is a problem. And make no mistake man, we *are* on the same side of this very real class war. I think the problem is with the above hypothesis. If conditions have gotten to the point where there is no means of staying alive but to get into debt, (which they have), something ought to be done to fix this problem, and trying to buck the market's chosen interst rates is in my opinion treating the and symptom not the disease.
Now if you're saying that we should lower the maximum interest rates *for purposes of class war* we have a different discussion altogether. I still don't think it's a good idea, but I'm a lot less sure of whether or not it will further any such process. So which is it? Should we lowering the maximum interest rates because of intent towards class war goals?
hold on.
two different things here. (here in soviet durkadurkanuckistan downloading copyrighted works here is not illegal, but whatever). Sure it's illegal.
But are you saying that because something is illegal that people should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law for any transgression against it? You have some pretty strong faith in legislators, man. (not to mention a pretty poor opinion of the people)
"Even worse are those that do it in front of their children -- what a great example."
Perhaps there is a greater lesson in enfringing copyright in front of children; music is more important than legality, and sometimes you need to do things that other people do not necessarily agree with (enfringing copyright) on the path to creating works that benifit everyone(music) in a better way with more magnitude.
The first truly evil entities known as corporations started about 1886. It's 2005 now. Well, according to my understanding of history it was closer to 1400, or 1200 where the first corporations started, but we'll assume you're source is right. It's been 119 years; one corporation out of 119 years of evil that's specifically designed as a dialectical result of anti-corporatism meshed with american capitalist idealism, and need.
It raises questions with the axiom "All corporations are evil", and possibly proves the axiom false, but the axiom still is useful in the vast majority of cases; that this corporation
might be an exception is not that remarkable. We've had 140, or if my sense of history is right, well over 800 years in order to get to the point where a not-evil corporation is even *conceivable*.
Mabye we need more companies like google. Direct competitors. Google-alikes in other markets. Imagine McGoogle. Walmoogle. ExonMoogle. I think in a world where corporations are growing more and more powerful, and where concentration of power is increasing, a corporation that is designed from the ground up to A) not be evil and B) serve customers in simple, widely appealing, easy to understand ways that do not demean or take pleasure in the exploitation and objectification(word?) of their workers---is a refreshing turn of events.
I'd say it is not their "stuff". It is their signal, mabye. It is the seeders hardware that has the stuff on it and it is your stuff if you're uploading it. It's their rights that are being enfringed though.
Secondly copyright enfringment is not theft. Do not equate the two, to do so is in error.
"Fairness would also involve passing laws that drop the maximum interest rate lenders can charge from 23.9% to something under 10%."
Why do you feel entitled to the lenders money? What if your desires are met, and it's pushed to something under 10%, and then guys like me suddenly can't get a loan any more because all the lender's capital is out with guys like you? fuck the poor? Because that's what lowering the interest amounts to. Think it's extortion? Don't borrow. Starve. I have been the "victim" of extortion and let me tell you that as evil as the credit card companies and other lenders are, this is not extortion, and there is no violence involved. A functional welfare state has no need for limits on lending whatsoever, and if your country cannot supply basic welfare that's the problem, not your country's lenders.
Secondly, fuck fair, what makes you think doing things fairly is even a good idea to begin with?
"it's with them being found to be liable in Canada for something they said in Washington DC."
This is the sort of thing that NAFTA ushered in*; We canucks have to worry about breaking american law, it's about time the converse has become recognized as a problem.
It's the sort of problem that trade deals with china will usher in with both the US and Canada. Wait for it; It will be illegal to say anything "libelous" or "defamatory" about anything specific in the PRC;
*I'm pretty sure. NAFTA was a very difficult read--if I'm mistaken please correct me
"Stopsaying"Bushregime."You'veneverexperienced lifeinaREALregimeorseenwhatarealregime does."
Regime is a blanket term denoting a specificgovernment or type of government in power. Bush is not only in power, but the republican party and certain parts of america have promoted Mr. Bush as some sort of figurehead worthy of reproaching anyone who would think or speak poorly of him; this is sure sign of an system ordered around one person, or a system designed to have the appearance to be ordered around one person.
Secondly,/. is a big place, and I'm sure there are plenty of people who have lived in or are currently living in a) martial law (ie in a military organization) b) wage-slavery (ok mabye not so common) c) virtual slavery (I've seen it, it happens) all of which I interpret you might be thinking when you say regime. So even if you weren't wrong, and regime meant something other than just a way of doing things with a specific group of people in charge, you would still be incorrect that no one here has experienced one. Hell I've seen more than one poster post from iraq! If that's not an example in your twisted view of the word, I don't know what is.
But seriously, You and me, and everyone here lives under some sort of regime. Some are democratic, some are nondemocratic, some are ruled democratically by crooks like Mr. Bush. But all are regimes."R'egime \R['e]`gime"\ (r?`zh?m"), n. [F. See lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilterfuck inglamenessfilter
1. Mode or system of rule or management; character of government, or of the prevailing social system.lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfil ter
lamelamelame[1913webster]lamelamelamelamelamelamel amelamelame
lamelamelamelamelamelameI dream...of the new r['lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfiltee] gime which is to come.--H. Kingsley.[1913 Webster]
lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilter{The ancient r['e]gime}, or {Ancien r['e]gime} [F.], the former political and social system, asdistinguished from the modern; especially, the political and social system existing in France before the Revolution of 1789. 1913 Webster]"
lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilter
lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilter
dictionary.com regimealso régime Audio pronunciation of "regime" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-zhm, r-)
n. 1.1. A form of government: a fascist regime.* 2. A government in power; administration: suffered under the new regime.* 2. A prevailing social system or pattern. 3. The period during which a particular administration or system prevails. 4. A regulated system, as of diet and exercise; a regimen.
fuckinglamenessfilterfuckinglamenessfilter
fuckinglamenessfilter
*italics are examples!
fuckinglamenessfilter
meriam webster
1 a : REGIMEN 1 b : a regular pattern of occurrence or action (as of seasonal rainfall) c : the characteristic behavior or orderly procedure of a natural phenomenon or process
2 a : mode of rule or management b : a form of government c : a government in power d : a period of rulefuckinglamenessfilternotice the above dictionary examples all signify quite plainly that indeed, your readers do indeed live under a regime; otherwise they'd be in some form of paradise anarchy, and I don't know of too many places that live under that kind of anarchy atm.
Thispostwasuterlyruinedbythelamenessfilter.Ihateyo ulamenessfilter
[nt]
Speaking of which, I refuse to metamoderate again until I get modpoints. It's been at least a year, possibly a year and a half, it's about time I got some modpoints.
"So you should ask yourself, "Realistically, does this job suck worse than any new job I might get?""
makes a lot of sense, but how about;
"Realistically does this job suck worse than any new job I might get? And is this beneficial difference offset by any percieved difficulty in finding another job?"
I've gotten into many positions throughout my life so far where the only way I'd be able to survive would be to quit my job and pray for better odds. You can't get a better job when you're working 12-16 hour days with no breaks or holidays and still cannot afford to feed yourself or pay rent. Remedy?
"not to mention the costs associated with marketing and promotion. These costs are huge"
Damnit I refuse to willingly pay for people to convince me that I am wrong, or what to buy!~ Label musicians and rackateers can fund their own damn lying and illusion(marketing) machine!
I beg your pardon? Do you think professional audio equipment is free?FUCK Professionalism. Destroy the notion.
There's enough garage sale recording equipment and shareware out there that you don't need to spend thousands to get a 1940's or 1960's era quality recording setup.
"I don't think arguing that we should have less music just because not all music is commercially successful will go very far. Do you?"
You missed a significant part of that. IF It's going to impact the lives of other people in a sufficiently negative way, then mabye forcing commercial success on those who do not warrent it is not justified hrm?
"t's *tough* when you are faced with working 75 - 90 hours a week, and then have to go home and raise a family and care for a home. But we do it, we do it gratefully, because it's afforded us girls a chance to stand on equal footing for once. At least I did."
why is it that the woman has to spend time with the children? I totally understand the 75-90 hours bit, but why is raising a family raised as a female specific thing? That doesn't sound like 'equal footing' to me, that sounds either like a perversion of equality or wage slavery. If it's the later, then I feel sympathy but I suspect the former.
There's a definite group of geeks that are materialists, without a doubt. I find they tend to use Microsoft Windows, warez, and have hardware that I tend to get 10 years down the road. Some of them are even open source users, though I find it's more common to be arguing in favour of open source and free software alternatives against them.
There are also those who are less "materialistic", those who are actively organizing their daily affairs for the utility of *others*, and who may not have the top-tech gear, may not shop at thinkgeek or drink bawls, but are nonetheless hardcore, perhaps fanatical enthusiasts in their chosen feild.
However these are two broad generalizations and I'm pretty sure if you live in north america(or possibly europe) there's no way that you can survive without some materialistic/capitalistic activity, but only certain people thrive at it and I do posit here that the first group tends more than the second to exhibit these activities, goals and worldview. I also think the first group is at least twice the size of the second.
I think your geek code should make clear what category you fall under, but I also think that it is a spectrum, and not clearly defined, if I can even be correct in grouping people like this.
I don't think the grandparent quite agrees with me, though, but I could be mistaken. I don't think that everyone will ever be geeky; I think we'll have a hard enough time trying to not nuke ourselves into oblivion for that.
Why exactly are we all running around spending hours of our own weekends/evenings etc. cleaning up the mess Microsoft made for them for free? Is your time and expertise worth nothing?
Doing good works is part of living a good life, you capitalist asshole. Not everything must be driven by the dollar.
People will either listen to reason, or they won't, but that's no excuse for me not to help them. (btw, This is coming from a geek who has pretty much run out of food and possibly money atm.)
the total cost of software approaches the cost of duplicating as the amount of duplicates is increased without limit, therefor the mean cost of a software unit approaches zero as the amount of duplicates is raised without limit. The cost of creating the software is not ignored, it is just not applicable on the order of magnitude that software distrobution takes place at. Little things like 'having efficient distrobution of software' are on a significant level of magnitude and must be weighed against as anything you may charge.
marketing, bullshit and lying on the other hand, is another story...if you factor in the cost of forcing people to buy your software, and forcing people to enjoy paying your price, that may raise the price somewhat. whether or not this is necessary I'll leave as an excersize to the reader.
Secondly, ad hominem attacks are never a good plan. Then again, this is/. so I can't really expect much you.;)
"Personally I'd like to believe that we're more intelligent than a virus cell, but all evidence seems against it."
The fact that you are saying this in itself seems to me evidence supporting the premis. The a vital step in solving a problem is to realize the nature of your problem. no?
Slashdot Mirror
don't have kids
Since when is knowing if the next iPod mini will have a colour screen any of the public's business? Since when is knowing if the next iPod mini will have a colour screen not the public's business?
and you think males in any other feild are any different? Or women for that matter?
Reality check here, most people are still living in "the 50's". Racism, sexism, outright idiocy and hatred are rampant, nevermind the intellectual racist-hatred-swill that the widespread moral relativism allows.
themusicgod1@jabberwocky.hn.org
and we can exchange ideas, and perhaps help each other if our skillset union permits.
But when you have no way of staying alive except digging yourself deeper and deeper into debt,
This is a problem. And make no mistake man, we *are* on the same side of this very real class war. I think the problem is with the above hypothesis. If conditions have gotten to the point where there is no means of staying alive but to get into debt, (which they have), something ought to be done to fix this problem, and trying to buck the market's chosen interst rates is in my opinion treating the and symptom not the disease.
Now if you're saying that we should lower the maximum interest rates *for purposes of class war* we have a different discussion altogether. I still don't think it's a good idea, but I'm a lot less sure of whether or not it will further any such process. So which is it? Should we lowering the maximum interest rates because of intent towards class war goals?
hold on. two different things here. (here in soviet durkadurkanuckistan downloading copyrighted works here is not illegal, but whatever). Sure it's illegal.
But are you saying that because something is illegal that people should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law for any transgression against it? You have some pretty strong faith in legislators, man. (not to mention a pretty poor opinion of the people)
"Even worse are those that do it in front of their children -- what a great example."
Perhaps there is a greater lesson in enfringing copyright in front of children; music is more important than legality, and sometimes you need to do things that other people do not necessarily agree with (enfringing copyright) on the path to creating works that benifit everyone(music) in a better way with more magnitude.
The first truly evil entities known as corporations started about 1886. It's 2005 now. Well, according to my understanding of history it was closer to 1400, or 1200 where the first corporations started, but we'll assume you're source is right. It's been 119 years; one corporation out of 119 years of evil that's specifically designed as a dialectical result of anti-corporatism meshed with american capitalist idealism, and need.
It raises questions with the axiom "All corporations are evil", and possibly proves the axiom false, but the axiom still is useful in the vast majority of cases; that this corporation might be an exception is not that remarkable. We've had 140, or if my sense of history is right, well over 800 years in order to get to the point where a not-evil corporation is even *conceivable*.
Mabye we need more companies like google. Direct competitors. Google-alikes in other markets. Imagine McGoogle. Walmoogle. ExonMoogle. I think in a world where corporations are growing more and more powerful, and where concentration of power is increasing, a corporation that is designed from the ground up to A) not be evil and B) serve customers in simple, widely appealing, easy to understand ways that do not demean or take pleasure in the exploitation and objectification(word?) of their workers---is a refreshing turn of events.
I'd say it is not their "stuff". It is their signal, mabye. It is the seeders hardware that has the stuff on it and it is your stuff if you're uploading it. It's their rights that are being enfringed though.
Secondly copyright enfringment is not theft. Do not equate the two, to do so is in error.
"Fairness would also involve passing laws that drop the maximum interest rate lenders can charge from 23.9% to something under 10%."
Why do you feel entitled to the lenders money? What if your desires are met, and it's pushed to something under 10%, and then guys like me suddenly can't get a loan any more because all the lender's capital is out with guys like you? fuck the poor? Because that's what lowering the interest amounts to. Think it's extortion? Don't borrow. Starve. I have been the "victim" of extortion and let me tell you that as evil as the credit card companies and other lenders are, this is not extortion, and there is no violence involved. A functional welfare state has no need for limits on lending whatsoever, and if your country cannot supply basic welfare that's the problem, not your country's lenders.
Secondly, fuck fair, what makes you think doing things fairly is even a good idea to begin with?
the crackdown on potheads came way before this guy got deported.
"it's with them being found to be liable in Canada for something they said in Washington DC."
This is the sort of thing that NAFTA ushered in*; We canucks have to worry about breaking american law, it's about time the converse has become recognized as a problem.
It's the sort of problem that trade deals with china will usher in with both the US and Canada. Wait for it; It will be illegal to say anything "libelous" or "defamatory" about anything specific in the PRC;
*I'm pretty sure. NAFTA was a very difficult read--if I'm mistaken please correct me
Youarefullofshit,andwrong.Changeyoursig.
/. is a big place, and I'm sure there are plenty of people who have lived in or are currently living in a) martial law (ie in a military organization) b) wage-slavery (ok mabye not so common) c) virtual slavery (I've seen it, it happens) all of which I interpret you might be thinking when you say regime. So even if you weren't wrong, and regime meant something other than just a way of doing things with a specific group of people in charge, you would still be incorrect that no one here has experienced one. Hell I've seen more than one poster post from iraq! If that's not an example in your twisted view of the word, I don't know what is.
But seriously, You and me, and everyone here lives under some sort of regime. Some are democratic, some are nondemocratic, some are ruled democratically by crooks like Mr. Bush. But all are regimes."R'egime \R['e]`gime"\ (r?`zh?m"), n. [F. See lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilterfuck inglamenessfilter
1. Mode or system of rule or management; character of government, or of the prevailing social system.lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfil ter
lamelamelame[1913webster]lamelamelamelamelamelamel amelamelame
lamelamelamelamelamelameI dream...of the new r['lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfiltee] gime which is to come.--H. Kingsley.[1913 Webster]
lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilter{The ancient r['e]gime}, or {Ancien r['e]gime} [F.], the former political and social system, asdistinguished from the modern; especially, the political and social system existing in France before the Revolution of 1789. 1913 Webster]"
lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilter
lamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamelamenessfilter
dictionary.com regimealso régime Audio pronunciation of "regime" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-zhm, r-)
n. 1.1. A form of government: a fascist regime.* 2. A government in power; administration: suffered under the new regime.* 2. A prevailing social system or pattern. 3. The period during which a particular administration or system prevails. 4. A regulated system, as of diet and exercise; a regimen.
fuckinglamenessfilterfuckinglamenessfilter
fuckinglamenessfilter
*italics are examples!
fuckinglamenessfilter
meriam webster
1 a : REGIMEN 1 b : a regular pattern of occurrence or action (as of seasonal rainfall) c : the characteristic behavior or orderly procedure of a natural phenomenon or process
2 a : mode of rule or management b : a form of government c : a government in power d : a period of rulefuckinglamenessfilternotice the above dictionary examples all signify quite plainly that indeed, your readers do indeed live under a regime; otherwise they'd be in some form of paradise anarchy, and I don't know of too many places that live under that kind of anarchy atm.
Thispostwasuterlyruinedbythelamenessfilter.Ihateyo ulamenessfilter
"Stopsaying"Bushregime."You'veneverexperienced lifeinaREALregimeorseenwhatarealregime does." Regime is a blanket term denoting a specificgovernment or type of government in power. Bush is not only in power, but the republican party and certain parts of america have promoted Mr. Bush as some sort of figurehead worthy of reproaching anyone who would think or speak poorly of him; this is sure sign of an system ordered around one person, or a system designed to have the appearance to be ordered around one person. Secondly,
[nt] Speaking of which, I refuse to metamoderate again until I get modpoints. It's been at least a year, possibly a year and a half, it's about time I got some modpoints.
" hires PR firms to post stock model photos as M$ switchers, "
like, beep beep beep much?
"So you should ask yourself, "Realistically, does this job suck worse than any new job I might get?""
makes a lot of sense, but how about; "Realistically does this job suck worse than any new job I might get? And is this beneficial difference offset by any percieved difficulty in finding another job?"
sounds like bad advice.
I've gotten into many positions throughout my life so far where the only way I'd be able to survive would be to quit my job and pray for better odds. You can't get a better job when you're working 12-16 hour days with no breaks or holidays and still cannot afford to feed yourself or pay rent. Remedy?
Costs vs Benefits
"not to mention the costs associated with marketing and promotion. These costs are huge"
Damnit I refuse to willingly pay for people to convince me that I am wrong, or what to buy!~ Label musicians and rackateers can fund their own damn lying and illusion(marketing) machine!
I beg your pardon? Do you think professional audio equipment is free? FUCK Professionalism. Destroy the notion. There's enough garage sale recording equipment and shareware out there that you don't need to spend thousands to get a 1940's or 1960's era quality recording setup.
"I don't think arguing that we should have less music just because not all music is commercially successful will go very far. Do you?" You missed a significant part of that. IF It's going to impact the lives of other people in a sufficiently negative way, then mabye forcing commercial success on those who do not warrent it is not justified hrm?
(Correct me if I'm wrong, IANAL, etc)
NAFTA brought them in. American patents on software are valid in Canada, and are just as valid as if you were in the states.
Unless I misread NAFTA. NAFTA is incredibly difficult to get through, likely on purpose.
"t's *tough* when you are faced with working 75 - 90 hours a week, and then have to go home and raise a family and care for a home. But we do it, we do it gratefully, because it's afforded us girls a chance to stand on equal footing for once. At least I did."
why is it that the woman has to spend time with the children? I totally understand the 75-90 hours bit, but why is raising a family raised as a female specific thing? That doesn't sound like 'equal footing' to me, that sounds either like a perversion of equality or wage slavery. If it's the later, then I feel sympathy but I suspect the former.
There's a definite group of geeks that are materialists, without a doubt. I find they tend to use Microsoft Windows, warez, and have hardware that I tend to get 10 years down the road. Some of them are even open source users, though I find it's more common to be arguing in favour of open source and free software alternatives against them. There are also those who are less "materialistic", those who are actively organizing their daily affairs for the utility of *others*, and who may not have the top-tech gear, may not shop at thinkgeek or drink bawls, but are nonetheless hardcore, perhaps fanatical enthusiasts in their chosen feild.
However these are two broad generalizations and I'm pretty sure if you live in north america(or possibly europe) there's no way that you can survive without some materialistic/capitalistic activity, but only certain people thrive at it and I do posit here that the first group tends more than the second to exhibit these activities, goals and worldview. I also think the first group is at least twice the size of the second.
I think your geek code should make clear what category you fall under, but I also think that it is a spectrum, and not clearly defined, if I can even be correct in grouping people like this.
I don't think the grandparent quite agrees with me, though, but I could be mistaken. I don't think that everyone will ever be geeky; I think we'll have a hard enough time trying to not nuke ourselves into oblivion for that.
Why exactly are we all running around spending hours of our own weekends/evenings etc. cleaning up the mess Microsoft made for them for free? Is your time and expertise worth nothing?
Doing good works is part of living a good life, you capitalist asshole. Not everything must be driven by the dollar.
People will either listen to reason, or they won't, but that's no excuse for me not to help them. (btw, This is coming from a geek who has pretty much run out of food and possibly money atm.)
the total cost of software approaches the cost of duplicating as the amount of duplicates is increased without limit, therefor the mean cost of a software unit approaches zero as the amount of duplicates is raised without limit. The cost of creating the software is not ignored, it is just not applicable on the order of magnitude that software distrobution takes place at. Little things like 'having efficient distrobution of software' are on a significant level of magnitude and must be weighed against as anything you may charge.
/. so I can't really expect much you. ;)
marketing, bullshit and lying on the other hand, is another story...if you factor in the cost of forcing people to buy your software, and forcing people to enjoy paying your price, that may raise the price somewhat. whether or not this is necessary I'll leave as an excersize to the reader.
Secondly, ad hominem attacks are never a good plan. Then again, this is
this 'posting less on slashdot' new years resolution is not going well. Anyone else have any ideas?
Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.
It's been 1 minute since you last successfully posted a comment
needs to be slain. Is anyone with me?
"Personally I'd like to believe that we're more intelligent than a virus cell, but all evidence seems against it."
The fact that you are saying this in itself seems to me evidence supporting the premis. The a vital step in solving a problem is to realize the nature of your problem. no?