I don't think this guy should do jail time but I DO think he should be kicked out of Harvard (and given an automatic F for the class he was trying to avoid finals for. The incident should also be on his record but no fine or time. Being kicked out of Harvard and a felony on his record should be enough to ruin his future and indicate what kind of scumbag he is.
A good analogy but I don't think "the bacteria is insightful to economics" is more than just an analogy. I highly doubt looking at a staph infection will help you find the next fortune 500 company that is just starting in someones garage. While both systems want to use "limited resources" the behavior of those resources and methods of aquiring them behave radically differently.
I would simply argue that it would hurt the show. Male fictional characters should stay male. If you want a show about a strong female- start a NEW show about a strong female character. I don't want the show addressing: -The whole idea of a man trapped inside a woman's body. -Is the new doctor attracted to men or women?
Please let the show just be cheap sci-fi and not about social re-engineering.
It is simple. The fifth ammendment is the right not to be tortured. If you won't talk, the government doesn't have the right to MAKE you talk. I love living in a country where the citizen's are not allowed to be tortured when the police think you are guilty.
Or perhaps it could be that people don't want to hit a cop now that they know that there is video proof. In some jurisdictions, assaults on police officer charges go nowhere in court (but are supposed to come with real jail time).
I always thought that the palm pilot was a great idea, but if it had phone functionality, it would be perfect. Blackberry never saw this idea too well. When Apple finally figured it out, Blackberry was dead man walking.
If you're abandoning a distro because you don't know how to change the default GUI, you probably shouldn't be looking at Linux in the first place.
With that logic, one could argue why have a distribution? Around 2003 I built my own Frankenstien distribution because I wanted to keep certain things the way I wanted them and each distribution just didn't cut it for me. The system worked great but I hated all the work involved to change anything. I then got too busy to care and went over to a distribution. If Linux is for only the hardcore, then it is a poor excuse for a computer system. The goal of any computer system SHOULD be to get things done (whether that is running a business or writing emails to friends and playing games) and NOT for working on the system itself. If a person is spending a lot of time learning how the system works to get what they want, then the system has failed that person.
It didn't say "this is perjury" it gave an analogy of how serious some contexts consider lie of omission (specifically the context of a court of law). The original post was saying the act wasn't the same as lying and the response simply pointed out that in some contexts it is considered equivalent to a lie.
But it is false. Lie by ommision is definately NOT perjury. Perjury is out and out lying. However if anyone ommits to say something in court... well that is built into the court proceedings with map hearings (what district atourney's are and are not allowed to bring up.).
We don't need to give people another excuse to be concerned about my health, which is a private matter. The government is already too concerned with my health. It would be nice to have big brother as a gym coach, except for the fact that they're much dumber than I am, especially when it comes to my health.
Yes lets have little girls and boys taking massive amounts of steroids and other hormonal changing drugs so that dimented parents can claim their baby is gods gift to little league and future olympics despite the consequences to their health and future. Why don't we just start pumping babies with drugs so that my little johnny will be 12 feet tall and play football/Basketball and three other yadda sports. What is wrong with people that they can't accept the limits of their body and be happy with the best they can do with who they are!!! Sports are a form of entertainment and entertainment should not be an excuse to modify humans. Lame is the excuse "that everybody is doing it so why can't I do it too" combined with the "its ok man- everybody else is doing it". I thought those arguments were lame in high school let alone the idea of thinking of this as reasonable logic as an adult. If you play a sport and you can't win through hard work and sweat and determination than accept who you are and have the integrity to accept it rather than cheat.
Ten percent is halfway to freedom in my opinion. If one in five personal computers are not windows then developers have to start thinking cross-platform and disregard a "windows only" attitude and this will create a big opportunity for people with linux not to have to worry about stuff not working for them.
Even the throw-away packaging somehow looks like someone really thought it through as to how it fits into the whole "product experience".
I like my ipod nano and I have no problems with it. But when I first bought it, I thought apple and steve jobs didn't actually want me to have it. Maybe they thought the insanley low price I bought it for ticked them off. I say this because to open the shrink wrap took me more than a half hour to open with my bare hands (and I am no week guy). Eventually after a bitter struggle and a few bruises, I managed to wrestle it away from apples shrink wrapped death grip yelling "I bought this damn you- It's MINE!";)
1. immense fame, 2. immense critical acclaim, 3. a willingness to experiment with radical new business models, and 4. gobs of money to serve as venture capital.
Aside from the possibilities of being totally unaware of his potential or unfortunately unwilling lead the movement as you imply is possible, I can conjure up no reasons as to why he hasn't tried already.
RISK! If this experiment failed it cost him some time and energy but to "start a revolution" could COST him a fortune thus making him broke. I'm guessing he wanted to see how things worked out for this album before doing anyhing more interesting. If this worked (as it seems to) then he might be willing to push it further but remember that most people HATE to lose money and fighting or competing with the RIAA might be a tad expensive on a large scale.
unfortunatelly both of those programs were designed to drive people to MS only products.
1) At one time MS wanted people using active X and IE (which fortunately failed because IE and active X was a such a security disaster). Active X could only run on windows.
2) WMP was meant to drive the internet toward.wmv and MS's sound and video formats. Sure you might be able to pirate the codecs for WMP but it is illegal and unfair competition. MS wanted to dominate the internet by controlling the future of sound and video on the internet. Fortunately the EU is trying to nip it in the bud.
It is not bad for MS to have a web browser or music player but those products should only be able to play/run open formats. and if MS wants to create a format, then they should provide those formats as open standards that anyone can use/implement. If you own an OS monopoly, you should not create formats that are not interoperable with other platforms because that is leveraging your monopoly to lock people into your monopoly unfairly.
The idea is that only IBM can be a patent troll!!! IBM is putting their mouth where it aught to be. IBM then can sue all patent trolls for - well being patent trolls!!!!! I love this idea!
GO IBM!!!
Of course it doesn't look anything remotely like a bomb to someone with even a day's worth of electronics experience - or at least, not the visible part
Actually the fact that the shirt was battery powered and the clay looks like C4, I would not know if it was a bomb.
A terrorist might think to hide ones intent in electric art - "see my shirt is just to light up cute words and this is clay in my hands because I like to play with clay".
Terrorist then plugs battery into C4 and blows up plane.
of course the scariest part of all this is that a real terrorist would probably disguise their bomb as a laptop which has a legitimate reason to have a battery in it.
If it were one of your family members wearing this thing, I suspect you'd feel differently.
My family would know to leave that shirt in baggage because they would have enough sense to know that shirt would not make it through the metal detectors (batteries and wires) let alone the concern it might raise with security. I would be more concerned with security telling me that I had to throw away the shirt (if I was wearing it) than I would of being shot.
Even if you think that, if it's not a bomb, why can't she be released? Why does somebody have to be held for carrying something that we thought was a bomb but turned out not to be? The situation is normal so everybody can go home, or am I missing something?
because the police don't want copy-cats or people looking to try to make/use alarming "art" in "sensitive areas". If you make the police come "huffing and puffing" and it turns out to be "just kidding", they charge you with things like "alarming the public" and legalese that mean alarming the public. i think the police are right and justified on this one- when you can't even carry a bottle of water onto a plane these days, the idea that you will be able to walk on with an electronics-arts sweater is rediculous. I would (and the police do) assume she knew that it would be alarming and did it to get a rise out of security. Common sense is you wear "sensible" cloths to the airport and leave your artistic cloths in baggage or at home.
i am a chess player and my chess bag with my chess clock got flagged as a bomb on various occasions because my chess clock looks like a bomb (when my chess bag goes through security). I would never think to hold my chess clock in my hand going through security or ignore a question regarding my chess clock. Security would hold me up for a minute while I explained what it was and why I had it (flying to a chess tournament). I find it fishy that someone going to MIT would not understand that what she was wearing might raise alarms at an airport.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I don't see how the fourth amendment protects against sampling the sewer system. The fourth amendment is nice but it does not mean that cops can't just search for crimes using evidence sampled from the environment and I would define the sewer system as public property.
How does the government really control all aspects of my life? Does the government stop me from any of the following:
a) starting a business
It depends on what business you want to start. Depending on what the business is government can make it harder to start. For instance my sister started trading, buying and selling on eBay. However in North Dakota the legislature has a law that require auctioneers to spend a lot of money to be licensed as an auctioneer. For those who are poor yet have the skills to sell on eBay this could prevent them from doing so, as least doing it legally.
b) selling a product
Same as above.
Rediculous! If you are selling enough product that you would need a liscence, the price of the liscence is cheap. If you don't sell much, you are an amatuer and the law was not intended to stop the casual seller.
d) expressing myself however I want
I guess you didn't try to attend any of Bush's campaign stops in 2006 wearing a tshirt that wasn't approved. Even Bush supporters were turned out when they appeared with tickets to events where Bush was. And it's not just Bush, both the Democratic and Republican Parties were able to get law enforcement where they had their conventions to setup "free speach zones" away from the conventions.
I see nothing wrong with this or any contradiction. Everybody has the right to express themselves but not at somebody else's party. If I had a party at my house and some guests had on t-shirts that said I was a an !@#%^, I can ask them to leave. They still have every right to wear whatever they want- just not in my house.
e) buying anything I want
Government prevent you from buying many thing legally. There's this fake "Drug War" going on which deprives people of liberty.
I will grant you this is true. However, most of the USA public thinks that this is a good thing. So while you and I might think otherwise, this is not really an issue since 80+% of the public agree with this position (in almost all parties).
f) eating however much I want, when I want, where I want
If you live in New York, or a number of other cities, yes. NYC has banned trans fats.
The answer is really no.
I live in new york and how has this stopped me from eating anything? What- some restaurants are not allowed to put heart-attack oil in my food anymore and have to use more expensive oils to prepare my food - I am so deprived!
As listed above, the answer is YES! Just because it's not as bad in the US as it is in most other countries it doesn't mean there isn't any restrictions on liberty in the US as well.
yes we have restrictions on freedom and I would argue that this is for the good. For example my freedom to kill whoever I want because I don't like them has been restricted. I am also not allowed to rape, assault, sell drugs to minors. Hell- I am not even allowed to slander you even though I don't agree with your point of view. So while my freedoms have been restricted, I am actually happy about this.
Do I like the USA PATRIOT ACT? No, I don't. However, I've not seen the Democrats do anything to even try to repeal it.
Of course, Democrats supported the PATROIT Act as much as the Republicans did. Not only that but as President Clinton tried to get many of the same powers. Only two congressmen voted against the Act, one from Wisconson though I don't recall his name, and Rep Ron Paul (R) of Texas. And the thing is is none of them read the whole thing!
While I too did not like the patriot act, I think if your complaints are trivial. Not being able to wear t-shirts to some party (that is not your own) or the fact that drugs are not legal and we have fda laws on food, you don't make any real good points about the "oppressiveness" of the USA. People in China, Korea, Saudia Arabia, etc... would laugh in your face over those issues.
that I survive most of the scenarios. I would hate to get a visit from the police saying my virtual self has just died some horrific death and that I should get in better shape for "just in case".:)
i remember the last g8 thing demanded major reform from usa while ignoring third world countries. if this is still the case, i could understand not wanting anything to do with it.
When Microsoft announced that Silverlight was going to be a cross-platform technology that only ran on Windows and Apple, I was extremely frustrated. I can understand why, strategically, Microsoft has chosen not to implement a Silverlight implementation on Linux, but I cannot understand why the majority of those commenting on this thread are arguing so vehemently against Miguel.
Silverlight is not just a reimplementation of Flash. Coding in.NET is a pleasure, and a can gaurantee you that coding for the Silverlight platform is going to be infinitely more organized and structured than coding for Flash. Website developers are going to flock to this new technology. Without a Linux implementation of Silverlight, 20% of websites will be completely inaccessible to Linux users in 5 years.
Miguel is trying to do great things but the problem is where the tech is going...
The internet revolves around platform independant tech and Microsoft has always been about only windows (and maybe mac for kicks).
encouraging a microsoft tech for the internet scares many (including myself) especially since they are the creators and have every right to control the vision of thier tech...
Most would actively like/want to discourage any microsoft tech and formats from having any influence over the internet.
As it is.doc,.wmp,.xls already are a frustrating reality of the IT infrastructure.
Many in the community would prefer to see open implementations of freely available tech as the only standards on the internet and microsoft has a long history of trying to thwart those goals.
Many see Miguel's efforts to implement MS tech as helping MS to embrace/extend/extinguish competitors. Specifically adobe and flash with this tech.
Adobe tries to make thier stuff TRULY crossplatform and MS is gunning for them with a competing product that IS NOT crossplatform. Instead of miguel thinking/saying DANGER, he is helping microsoft in its goals.
I think Miguel has a dream and that dream is tied to MS products and he does what he wants (and I respect that) but the reason for the [over]reaction of the/. comunity is that MS has done some scary stuff in the past to destroy competitors and tie users to windows that anyone who helps MS is seen to be helping MS to achieve those ends.
So even though, I believe Miguel is truly just in love with the tech., its fustrating to some in the community to see MS pandered to.
Why is any company expected to kill its most profitable product, so some other less profitable product can realize "its full potential"? No one can ask from Microsoft to take active steps in destroying its profits and going bankrupt.
You pointed it out perfectly. When Microsoft makes a developer product it is a conflict of interest to make that product portable. Almost all other developer oriented companies don't have this conflict of interest. So as a developer, it is best to avoid MS development products. MS knows this and so now is claiming they too can be cross-platform but they are lying because they know they have a conflict of interest. All the posts above and below are pointing out that MS is lying and they should either change their claim of cross platform or actually make thier stuff cross platform.
Unfortunately MS is trying to trap more people to MS by claiming "cross platform" while not providing "cross platform" which is evil/ugly/sad.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think this guy should do jail time but I DO think he should be kicked out of Harvard (and given an automatic F for the class he was trying to avoid finals for. The incident should also be on his record but no fine or time. Being kicked out of Harvard and a felony on his record should be enough to ruin his future and indicate what kind of scumbag he is.
A good analogy but I don't think "the bacteria is insightful to economics" is more than just an analogy. I highly doubt looking at a staph infection will help you find the next fortune 500 company that is just starting in someones garage. While both systems want to use "limited resources" the behavior of those resources and methods of aquiring them behave radically differently.
I would simply argue that it would hurt the show. Male fictional characters should stay male. If you want a show about a strong female- start a NEW show about a strong female character. I don't want the show addressing:
-The whole idea of a man trapped inside a woman's body.
-Is the new doctor attracted to men or women?
Please let the show just be cheap sci-fi and not about social re-engineering.
It is simple. The fifth ammendment is the right not to be tortured. If you won't talk, the government doesn't have the right to MAKE you talk. I love living in a country where the citizen's are not allowed to be tortured when the police think you are guilty.
Or perhaps it could be that people don't want to hit a cop now that they know that there is video proof. In some jurisdictions, assaults on police officer charges go nowhere in court (but are supposed to come with real jail time).
I always thought that the palm pilot was a great idea, but if it had phone functionality, it would be perfect. Blackberry never saw this idea too well. When Apple finally figured it out, Blackberry was dead man walking.
This is MS's way of reminding other companies that a partnership with Microsoft is merily a list of companies that MS can label as suckers.
If you're abandoning a distro because you don't know how to change the default GUI, you probably shouldn't be looking at Linux in the first place.
With that logic, one could argue why have a distribution? Around 2003 I built my own Frankenstien distribution because I wanted to keep certain things the way I wanted them and each distribution just didn't cut it for me. The system worked great but I hated all the work involved to change anything. I then got too busy to care and went over to a distribution. If Linux is for only the hardcore, then it is a poor excuse for a computer system. The goal of any computer system SHOULD be to get things done (whether that is running a business or writing emails to friends and playing games) and NOT for working on the system itself. If a person is spending a lot of time learning how the system works to get what they want, then the system has failed that person.
But it is false. Lie by ommision is definately NOT perjury. Perjury is out and out lying. However if anyone ommits to say something in court... well that is built into the court proceedings with map hearings (what district atourney's are and are not allowed to bring up.).
We don't need to give people another excuse to be concerned about my health, which is a private matter. The government is already too concerned with my health. It would be nice to have big brother as a gym coach, except for the fact that they're much dumber than I am, especially when it comes to my health.
Yes lets have little girls and boys taking massive amounts of steroids and other hormonal changing drugs so that dimented parents can claim their baby is gods gift to little league and future olympics despite the consequences to their health and future. Why don't we just start pumping babies with drugs so that my little johnny will be 12 feet tall and play football/Basketball and three other yadda sports. What is wrong with people that they can't accept the limits of their body and be happy with the best they can do with who they are!!! Sports are a form of entertainment and entertainment should not be an excuse to modify humans. Lame is the excuse "that everybody is doing it so why can't I do it too" combined with the "its ok man- everybody else is doing it". I thought those arguments were lame in high school let alone the idea of thinking of this as reasonable logic as an adult. If you play a sport and you can't win through hard work and sweat and determination than accept who you are and have the integrity to accept it rather than cheat.
Still 10% is comparitivly a drop in the bucket.
Ten percent is halfway to freedom in my opinion. If one in five personal computers are not windows then developers have to start thinking cross-platform and disregard a "windows only" attitude and this will create a big opportunity for people with linux not to have to worry about stuff not working for them.
I like my ipod nano and I have no problems with it. But when I first bought it, I thought apple and steve jobs didn't actually want me to have it. Maybe they thought the insanley low price I bought it for ticked them off. I say this because to open the shrink wrap took me more than a half hour to open with my bare hands (and I am no week guy). Eventually after a bitter struggle and a few bruises, I managed to wrestle it away from apples shrink wrapped death grip yelling "I bought this damn you- It's MINE!" ;)
I wear a kevlar vest as part of my job and while thick, it is flexible.
RISK! If this experiment failed it cost him some time and energy but to "start a revolution" could COST him a fortune thus making him broke. I'm guessing he wanted to see how things worked out for this album before doing anyhing more interesting. If this worked (as it seems to) then he might be willing to push it further but remember that most people HATE to lose money and fighting or competing with the RIAA might be a tad expensive on a large scale.
unfortunatelly both of those programs were designed to drive people to MS only products. 1) At one time MS wanted people using active X and IE (which fortunately failed because IE and active X was a such a security disaster). Active X could only run on windows. 2) WMP was meant to drive the internet toward .wmv and MS's sound and video formats. Sure you might be able to pirate the codecs for WMP but it is illegal and unfair competition. MS wanted to dominate the internet by controlling the future of sound and video on the internet. Fortunately the EU is trying to nip it in the bud.
It is not bad for MS to have a web browser or music player but those products should only be able to play/run open formats. and if MS wants to create a format, then they should provide those formats as open standards that anyone can use/implement. If you own an OS monopoly, you should not create formats that are not interoperable with other platforms because that is leveraging your monopoly to lock people into your monopoly unfairly.
The idea is that only IBM can be a patent troll!!! IBM is putting their mouth where it aught to be. IBM then can sue all patent trolls for - well being patent trolls!!!!! I love this idea! GO IBM!!!
Actually the fact that the shirt was battery powered and the clay looks like C4, I would not know if it was a bomb.
A terrorist might think to hide ones intent in electric art - "see my shirt is just to light up cute words and this is clay in my hands because I like to play with clay".
Terrorist then plugs battery into C4 and blows up plane.
of course the scariest part of all this is that a real terrorist would probably disguise their bomb as a laptop which has a legitimate reason to have a battery in it.
My family would know to leave that shirt in baggage because they would have enough sense to know that shirt would not make it through the metal detectors (batteries and wires) let alone the concern it might raise with security. I would be more concerned with security telling me that I had to throw away the shirt (if I was wearing it) than I would of being shot.
because the police don't want copy-cats or people looking to try to make/use alarming "art" in "sensitive areas". If you make the police come "huffing and puffing" and it turns out to be "just kidding", they charge you with things like "alarming the public" and legalese that mean alarming the public. i think the police are right and justified on this one- when you can't even carry a bottle of water onto a plane these days, the idea that you will be able to walk on with an electronics-arts sweater is rediculous. I would (and the police do) assume she knew that it would be alarming and did it to get a rise out of security. Common sense is you wear "sensible" cloths to the airport and leave your artistic cloths in baggage or at home.
i am a chess player and my chess bag with my chess clock got flagged as a bomb on various occasions because my chess clock looks like a bomb (when my chess bag goes through security). I would never think to hold my chess clock in my hand going through security or ignore a question regarding my chess clock. Security would hold me up for a minute while I explained what it was and why I had it (flying to a chess tournament). I find it fishy that someone going to MIT would not understand that what she was wearing might raise alarms at an airport.
I don't see how the fourth amendment protects against sampling the sewer system. The fourth amendment is nice but it does not mean that cops can't just search for crimes using evidence sampled from the environment and I would define the sewer system as public property.
How does the government really control all aspects of my life? Does the government stop me from any of the following:
a) starting a business
It depends on what business you want to start. Depending on what the business is government can make it harder to start. For instance my sister started trading, buying and selling on eBay. However in North Dakota the legislature has a law that require auctioneers to spend a lot of money to be licensed as an auctioneer. For those who are poor yet have the skills to sell on eBay this could prevent them from doing so, as least doing it legally.
b) selling a product
Same as above.
Rediculous! If you are selling enough product that you would need a liscence, the price of the liscence is cheap. If you don't sell much, you are an amatuer and the law was not intended to stop the casual seller.
d) expressing myself however I want
I guess you didn't try to attend any of Bush's campaign stops in 2006 wearing a tshirt that wasn't approved. Even Bush supporters were turned out when they appeared with tickets to events where Bush was. And it's not just Bush, both the Democratic and Republican Parties were able to get law enforcement where they had their conventions to setup "free speach zones" away from the conventions.
I see nothing wrong with this or any contradiction. Everybody has the right to express themselves but not at somebody else's party. If I had a party at my house and some guests had on t-shirts that said I was a an !@#%^, I can ask them to leave. They still have every right to wear whatever they want- just not in my house.
e) buying anything I want
Government prevent you from buying many thing legally. There's this fake "Drug War" going on which deprives people of liberty.
I will grant you this is true. However, most of the USA public thinks that this is a good thing. So while you and I might think otherwise, this is not really an issue since 80+% of the public agree with this position (in almost all parties).
f) eating however much I want, when I want, where I want
If you live in New York, or a number of other cities, yes. NYC has banned trans fats.
The answer is really no.
I live in new york and how has this stopped me from eating anything? What- some restaurants are not allowed to put heart-attack oil in my food anymore and have to use more expensive oils to prepare my food - I am so deprived!
As listed above, the answer is YES! Just because it's not as bad in the US as it is in most other countries it doesn't mean there isn't any restrictions on liberty in the US as well.
yes we have restrictions on freedom and I would argue that this is for the good. For example my freedom to kill whoever I want because I don't like them has been restricted. I am also not allowed to rape, assault, sell drugs to minors. Hell- I am not even allowed to slander you even though I don't agree with your point of view. So while my freedoms have been restricted, I am actually happy about this.
Do I like the USA PATRIOT ACT? No, I don't. However, I've not seen the Democrats do anything to even try to repeal it.
Of course, Democrats supported the PATROIT Act as much as the Republicans did. Not only that but as President Clinton tried to get many of the same powers. Only two congressmen voted against the Act, one from Wisconson though I don't recall his name, and Rep Ron Paul (R) of Texas. And the thing is is none of them read the whole thing!
While I too did not like the patriot act, I think if your complaints are trivial. Not being able to wear t-shirts to some party (that is not your own) or the fact that drugs are not legal and we have fda laws on food, you don't make any real good points about the "oppressiveness" of the USA. People in China, Korea, Saudia Arabia, etc... would laugh in your face over those issues.
that I survive most of the scenarios. I would hate to get a visit from the police saying my virtual self has just died some horrific death and that I should get in better shape for "just in case". :)
i remember the last g8 thing demanded major reform from usa while ignoring third world countries. if this is still the case, i could understand not wanting anything to do with it.
Miguel is trying to do great things but the problem is where the tech is going...
The internet revolves around platform independant tech and Microsoft has always been about only windows (and maybe mac for kicks).
encouraging a microsoft tech for the internet scares many (including myself) especially since they are the creators and have every right to control the vision of thier tech...
Most would actively like/want to discourage any microsoft tech and formats from having any influence over the internet.
As it is .doc, .wmp, .xls already are a frustrating reality of the IT infrastructure.
Many in the community would prefer to see open implementations of freely available tech as the only standards on the internet and microsoft has a long history of trying to thwart those goals.
Many see Miguel's efforts to implement MS tech as helping MS to embrace/extend/extinguish competitors. Specifically adobe and flash with this tech.
Adobe tries to make thier stuff TRULY crossplatform and MS is gunning for them with a competing product that IS NOT crossplatform. Instead of miguel thinking/saying DANGER, he is helping microsoft in its goals.
I think Miguel has a dream and that dream is tied to MS products and he does what he wants (and I respect that) but the reason for the [over]reaction of the /. comunity is that MS has done some scary stuff in the past to destroy competitors and tie users to windows that anyone who helps MS is seen to be helping MS to achieve those ends.
So even though, I believe Miguel is truly just in love with the tech., its fustrating to some in the community to see MS pandered to.
You pointed it out perfectly. When Microsoft makes a developer product it is a conflict of interest to make that product portable. Almost all other developer oriented companies don't have this conflict of interest. So as a developer, it is best to avoid MS development products. MS knows this and so now is claiming they too can be cross-platform but they are lying because they know they have a conflict of interest. All the posts above and below are pointing out that MS is lying and they should either change their claim of cross platform or actually make thier stuff cross platform.
Unfortunately MS is trying to trap more people to MS by claiming "cross platform" while not providing "cross platform" which is evil/ugly/sad.