Google will modify its motto to "Do no evil, but let a little justice slip out occasionally" and keep MicroSoft alive.
Why? Because to vanquish would be merciful, and Redmond deserves to wallow in the wreckage of its APIs for as long as possible.
http://distrowatch.com/stats.php?section=popularit y
by happy coincidence, lists 357 distros.
Redmond has bought off a couple already, and certainly a healthy chunk have a userbase in a low power of two. That leaves a couple hundered in the middle somewhere.
So the strategy can't be to try to bail out the ocean. Redmond's business acumen is way beyond that.
I'm thinking that this is all about hedging against further anti-trust litigation: "But dad! We played nice with a whole bunch of those kids. That pile of human wreckage over in the corner is just a bunch of lazy whiners."
Consider http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX
These arguably wrong-headed licenses will exist as long as the market for them exists.
Not unlike narcotics.
However, people keeping their wallets closed is an unambiguous signal.
They grab that tube, start at one end of the brush, and just hammer that brush, covering it to the last bristle with toothpaste.
Is the cleanliness of the teeth proportional to the amount of paste used? No.
Are sales driven by encouraging people to use more product? Yes.
Why does the 'corporate we' seem so surprised when we occasionally wake up and realize that vendors are trying to cajole more sales?
threat of users employing a hypervisor as a man-in-the-middle to intercept traffic between the guest (Windows) and the host (Linux). Of course, this would be for the purposes of personal edification and private curiosity. Some discovery of the shenanigans employed to maintain the slaver^W"intellectual property" of the guest OS would be an unfortunate side-effect.
then the reason for the clanging sound of the sphincter trying to open, slamming shut, and then opening again may be more clear.
Who's placing the Bush administration above reproach?
I, for one, stand relieved at the resluts of the 2006 election, when we finally traded a culture of corruption for a culture of a different sort Kristen Wiig is all that. But her site, alas, ain't. I think/. should volunteer to help.
You stated it a bit more clearly than me.
On an acute basis, we need concentrated power. Once people are ensconced, they want to wield their power on a chronic basis. It's too easy to ignore the creeping acquisition of power.
Aye, and the states lost. And, nearly 150 years later, we've at least partially overcome the bogusness of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromi se
If you were to model the government as a pure software application (and it's clearly not, but bear with me), you would want nice layers of abstraction, encapsulation, and data hiding, so that the main logic (the Fed) doesn't have to "bicker and argue over who killed who", or fret about individual citizens.
That civil war occurred when information systems were implemented in pure people-ware, with paper storage. So concentrating power made sense, particularly in light of things like WWI, WWII, and the cold war.
Yet now you have all of this IRS, SSA, and other entitlement programs, and it's all in one giant, nearly inert codebase executing (everything but itself), within the beltway. Your vote is drowned out in the cacophony of voters.
But we can be confident that Lessons Learned only beget opportunities to repeat themselves.
Actually, OP is the one playing God, and I was tossing in a suggestion.
The thought of trying to set myself up as an entity capable of trotting out Reality humbles me nearly to total silence.
As long as you're dreaming, why not remove the entropy from the human soul, so that people don't do the obviously wrong thing, and seek resolution in the greyer areas.
Because the nebulousness of "Intellectual Property" bears repeating until those that insist on belief in that specious claim confine themselves to plooking each other?
With sufficient money in the game, the legislation is doomed.
lawsuits and patent licensing is how they do business
Which is why their business should be attacked in the marketplace through better visibility of a) who is the troll, and b) who are they doing business with. We need to create the anti-troll.
Which hints at the ultimate remedy for this nonsense:
Shaming.
When companies engage in blatant absurdity, and try to abuse the legal system in the name of lining their wallets, the online community needs to publicize the fact that these companies suck much pond water.
After enough negative profit impact from bogus lawsuits, even the most pointy-haired of bosses will get the memo.
If the gubmint can't do the right thing, then let's rally the market.
Consider this still-steaming loaf of farce:
"Our law enforcement resources are seriously misaligned," NBC/Universal general counsel Rick Cotton said. "If you add up all the various kinds of property crimes in this country, everything from theft, to fraud, to burglary, bank-robbing, all of it, it costs the country $16 billion a year. But intellectual property crime runs to hundreds of billions [of dollars] a year." http://www.contentagenda.com/CA6452245.html
There is little excuse for 95+% of the US to not have a decent broadband level.
Excuse?
Is this yet another reason I'm supposed to feel anxious and inadequate, because someone has thrown out a number that says the corporate 'we' is inferior?
Look, if your body is producing insufficient testosterone on its own, seek medical treatment.
Anyone buying into some dismal, chicken-little line of nonsense foisted by
a politician
a marketing drone
a lawyer
a misbegotten blend of the above
deserves to be ignored.
Once you've squared yourself away, start a company and go fix the problem, you whiner.
This would become counter-productive.
If you're hanging around taking such shots, you might be taken for someone with nefarious purpose.
Worse still, you could be tagged as Google, find yourself awash in resumes, then busted for littering, as the wind disperses those little sheets of fabrication like so much political propaganda.
Why does the state need so much control when it can so easily be voted out within 4 years?
Precedent.
As you slide the Overton window, people become acclimated to whatever arguably wrongheaded idea you want to implement.
Just to drop an example, it is practically impossible to float a serious policy question along the lines of "should the federal government tax the income of individual citizens?".
Regardless of your opinion of whether a more states-rights approach would make sense the IRS is here to stay. "The savage civil servant's beady eyes"[1] glow with pleasure at the thought of shaping public behavior through tax policy. The change of administration, like a shift of wind at sea, has no effect on the current below the whitecaps.
However, Al Gore's little internet invention may become a feedback loop to restore some liberty, if http://porkbusters.org/ has any impact.
This does not constitute legal advice, but consider this:
the point of the GPL is to set up a community wherein source code is treated as chess pieces. Everything sits in plain view. You're asking to change a fundamental assertion about how the community functions. You want a face-down playing card on the board to represent one of your pieces, in your variation.
No one gets enthusiastic about having their basic assertions tweaked. The reaction is going to range from silence to rage.
Admired from a distance, one has to admire your courage. It's akin to walking into a kosher restaurant and ordering a ham and cheese sandwich.
Best wishes,
C
Slashdot Mirror
Google will modify its motto to "Do no evil, but let a little justice slip out occasionally" and keep MicroSoft alive.
Why? Because to vanquish would be merciful, and Redmond deserves to wallow in the wreckage of its APIs for as long as possible.
http://distrowatch.com/stats.php?section=popularit y
by happy coincidence, lists 357 distros.
Redmond has bought off a couple already, and certainly a healthy chunk have a userbase in a low power of two. That leaves a couple hundered in the middle somewhere.
So the strategy can't be to try to bail out the ocean. Redmond's business acumen is way beyond that.
I'm thinking that this is all about hedging against further anti-trust litigation:
"But dad! We played nice with a whole bunch of those kids. That pile of human wreckage over in the corner is just a bunch of lazy whiners."
Consider http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX
These arguably wrong-headed licenses will exist as long as the market for them exists.
Not unlike narcotics.
However, people keeping their wallets closed is an unambiguous signal.
They grab that tube, start at one end of the brush, and just hammer that brush, covering it to the last bristle with toothpaste.
Is the cleanliness of the teeth proportional to the amount of paste used? No.
Are sales driven by encouraging people to use more product? Yes.
Why does the 'corporate we' seem so surprised when we occasionally wake up and realize that vendors are trying to cajole more sales?
Let me help with a possible translation. If we read this as: then the reason for the clanging sound of the sphincter trying to open, slamming shut, and then opening again may be more clear.
Who's placing the Bush administration above reproach? /. should volunteer to help.
I, for one, stand relieved at the resluts of the 2006 election, when we finally traded a culture of corruption for a culture of a different sort
Kristen Wiig is all that. But her site, alas, ain't. I think
You stated it a bit more clearly than me.
On an acute basis, we need concentrated power. Once people are ensconced, they want to wield their power on a chronic basis. It's too easy to ignore the creeping acquisition of power.
If you were to model the government as a pure software application (and it's clearly not, but bear with me), you would want nice layers of abstraction, encapsulation, and data hiding, so that the main logic (the Fed) doesn't have to "bicker and argue over who killed who", or fret about individual citizens.
That civil war occurred when information systems were implemented in pure people-ware, with paper storage. So concentrating power made sense, particularly in light of things like WWI, WWII, and the cold war.
Yet now you have all of this IRS, SSA, and other entitlement programs, and it's all in one giant, nearly inert codebase executing (everything but itself), within the beltway. Your vote is drowned out in the cacophony of voters.
But we can be confident that Lessons Learned only beget opportunities to repeat themselves.
...vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?
Stand by for a massage from the Swedish Prime Minister.
Actually, OP is the one playing God, and I was tossing in a suggestion.
The thought of trying to set myself up as an entity capable of trotting out Reality humbles me nearly to total silence.
As long as you're dreaming, why not remove the entropy from the human soul, so that people don't do the obviously wrong thing, and seek resolution in the greyer areas.
Because the nebulousness of "Intellectual Property" bears repeating until those that insist on belief in that specious claim confine themselves to plooking each other?
Which is why their business should be attacked in the marketplace through better visibility of a) who is the troll, and b) who are they doing business with. We need to create the anti-troll.
Shaming.
When companies engage in blatant absurdity, and try to abuse the legal system in the name of lining their wallets, the online community needs to publicize the fact that these companies suck much pond water.
After enough negative profit impact from bogus lawsuits, even the most pointy-haired of bosses will get the memo.
If the gubmint can't do the right thing, then let's rally the market.
Consider this still-steaming loaf of farce: RMS torpedoed this one nicely: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html
Unfortunately, money both talks and buys legislation.
Is this yet another reason I'm supposed to feel anxious and inadequate, because someone has thrown out a number that says the corporate 'we' is inferior?
Look, if your body is producing insufficient testosterone on its own, seek medical treatment.
Anyone buying into some dismal, chicken-little line of nonsense foisted by
- a politician
- a marketing drone
- a lawyer
- a misbegotten blend of the above
deserves to be ignored.Once you've squared yourself away, start a company and go fix the problem, you whiner.
Slashdot, or the game?
As you mature, the sophomoric bits of youth can often lose their shine.
This would become counter-productive.
If you're hanging around taking such shots, you might be taken for someone with nefarious purpose.
Worse still, you could be tagged as Google, find yourself awash in resumes, then busted for littering, as the wind disperses those little sheets of fabrication like so much political propaganda.
http://worsethanfailure.com/
I've got dozens of friends and the fun never ends
That is, as long as I'm buying
As you slide the Overton window, people become acclimated to whatever arguably wrongheaded idea you want to implement.
Just to drop an example, it is practically impossible to float a serious policy question along the lines of "should the federal government tax the income of individual citizens?".
Regardless of your opinion of whether a more states-rights approach would make sense the IRS is here to stay. "The savage civil servant's beady eyes"[1] glow with pleasure at the thought of shaping public behavior through tax policy. The change of administration, like a shift of wind at sea, has no effect on the current below the whitecaps.
However, Al Gore's little internet invention may become a feedback loop to restore some liberty, if http://porkbusters.org/ has any impact.
[1]http://www.google.com/musics?lid=8yCLpO47IjD&a
This does not constitute legal advice, but consider this:
the point of the GPL is to set up a community wherein source code is treated as chess pieces. Everything sits in plain view. You're asking to change a fundamental assertion about how the community functions. You want a face-down playing card on the board to represent one of your pieces, in your variation.
No one gets enthusiastic about having their basic assertions tweaked. The reaction is going to range from silence to rage.
Admired from a distance, one has to admire your courage. It's akin to walking into a kosher restaurant and ordering a ham and cheese sandwich.
Best wishes,
C
So, why would someone with a nick like "Red Flayer" be so rough on automobiles? ;)
Do you run a horse and buggy dealership?