Now the company that makes tape decks decides to charge manufacturers for a tape deck in every stereo they produce, even if it only comes with a record player.
I see you are doing an an analogy here. I see whre you are taking it but what is a record player an analogy of? I need some detail here because that is just confusing.
Most consumers want to have tape decks so there is nothing the stereo producers can do unless they want to spend twice as much for the tape decks, and if they don't put a tape deck in the stereo anyway, they'll have to pay for it so they go ahead.
This is one of the points I have been trying to make. Consumers want windows. I am glad you concur.
Now imagine that another company invents the CD player. The quality is better, the CDs last longer, and you can skip between songs. But no manufacturers produce stereos with CD players because they would have to pay the other company for the tape deck anyway. In addition to paying for the CD player, you'd be paying the first company for the Tape player even though the stereo had a CD player instead. Who would buy these stereos that cost twice as much and don't support the readily available audio tapes? What company would produce CDs when so few people had the equipment to play them?
What the hell are you trying to say here? You lost me with this paragraph. I tried to take it apart but it does not make any sense. I assume that the Tape Player is still Windows and now I naturally assume the CD Player is Linux. But if a company that makes computers wants to have a CD player instead of a tape player they could install the CD player without having to pay for the tape player ever again. Then again they lose their market because everyone wants tapes and a tape player. Am I even following you here? What happened to record players?
And the equalizer comment also didn't make a lot of sense. But here I go. I assume that the equalizer is a web browser. What you are trying to say I suppose is that there are better browsers out there because of the 10 band 5 band analogy. But companies can't bundle other equalizers with the tape deck? Are you smoking crack? I have seen OEM's install Netscape right along side Explorer. Nothing wrong with that.
So I really can't post anymore because... you analogy was bad and didn't flow. So I will end on this note. Find a better analogy so I can start and intellectual debate with you or don't post at all. My god... I feel dumber for just reading that.
This whole case is a joke. I mean seriously. Microsoft is a buisness. Buisnesses are created to generate revenue, i.e. money. When one has a good idea and goes with it. Others think the idea is good and come up with there own leagal versions creating competition. How else do you kill competition? You result to The Art of War. You go about legal means to get the point across that you are the better of the competition.
Microsoft has done precisely this. They have followed Sun Tzu's teachings like any "good" business prfofessional would do. Business is war. Capitalism is war. Survival of the fittest. No holds barred anything goes so long as you win. What you call strong-arm tactics and bullying, I call fighting a battle. How else would Microsoft have the money they have if they didn't make the deals with the OEM's.
You can say they threatened OEM's all you want. I Don't think any threats really happened. You are blowing this up to somthing it never was. Take this for an example. You own a company. What you do is sell computers to consumers. You originally sign an agreement with Microsoft to have Windows installed on your systems. In this agreement you agree to a series of terms that give you the ability to have Windows in all its form and grace. Now you decide down the road you want to break a few of these terms. Microsoft is going to respond with, "if you do this you will be in violation of our agreement and hence will be taken to court because we had a valid contract that you agreed upon."
This isn't a threat. This is simply Microsoft enforcing the rules you agreed upon. YOu break the rules and you lose your license to Windows and MS and you go outta business. Slow death. You could run Linux on all your systems, but most OEM's deal with consumers who are typically computer morons, so showcasing an OS that #1 isn't an industry client standard and #2 wouldn't run the applications that are compatible with the standard. What I mean by that is, you have kids who want to play the latest Warcraft 3 for example... you go buy it but can't get the damn thing installed because you are computer illiterate and have no idea what OS you got. ALl you know is it looks pretty and has a penguin as its mascot.
Slow death.
You can call Microsoft anything you want, but it will never change their position in the market as #1. It doesn't matter how many peoples opinions you change. Linux isn't a client standard like Windows is and never will be. The only head way Linux will make is as a workstation or as a server but never on the client level. Clients are rulled by the computer illiterate who want somthing that works and has great Product Support for their volume. (Stop, read that last sentence again so you don't freak out and go OMG, WTF, HDH)
Well that is all I really have to say but on a closing note. Ever notice how communistic pure OSS individuals are. Everything free, everything equal. Communists had this ideaology. Where if your neighbor had a car, you had a car. If they had a house, you had a house. Now really think about this one. Communism doesn't work that well. If you have doubts about that. Go back and read your history books.
I mean in all honesty how can you honestly prove microsoft has stolen code as many times as you seem to say they have. This seems like FUD. That is right... YOU are slinging gobs of FUD. (I can use bold case too)
Where is your proof? Where is your cold hard evidence that this is happening? Over and over and over. I am not kidding. I sure don't see any. What I see is a generalization. A mere idea that this is happening. You don't have any real proof. I mean if this were happening large companies like IBM, Digital, SCO, Pen Conputing and Mircografx would sue and win because plagerization is illegal. Not kidding. IBM is a power house and would sue the shit outta Microsoft for a nice little cut of the pie. You cannot deny this. IF! it was even happening.
See what you are is a Linux adovocate. All open source or nothing at all. What irritates me about people like you is how damn happy and excited you get when shit hits the fan against a company that you dislike. I mean, it doesn't have any direct effect on your life. What Microsoft does doesn't affect how you live, breathe, eat or drink. You are an Open Source guy. You are all about it. So who cares what Microsoft does. It isn't going to affect Linux at all. Not in your eyes. Because from every angle, you view Linux as a superior OS. Above the rest. The pinnacle of OS evolution. Well yippee for you! I am happy that you are happy. Ecstatic even. I also think you are full of negativity if you can take that much time to write a post that totally attacks somthing that doesn't effect you in any way at all.
The only time you might feel the push is when Microsoft reclaims the portion of the server market they lost. They will get it back. I can tell you why to. It has nothing to do with Windows. It has to do with War. A war is being fought and I can guarentee, unless the "judge" decides to split the company. They will reclaim their throne. It is how they fight. YOu think they are just gonna sit there and watch Linux take over. If you do think that, you are kidding yourself. No way. Won't happen.
I am not a Microsoft advocate, I am a realist. And reality is a bitter-sweet idea. Suck it up. IBM doesn't have the leg room to move Linux to the ground it needs to be on. COnsidering COmpaq and HP merged. A new dawn is coming. Watch out. Fight all you want but Microsoft has an edge that Open Source doesn't. They have your source code, and you don't have theirs.
You guys always bitch about MS spreading FUD, but this (above) comment is FUD.
You can't knock it until you try it. Windows comes with IE, it has since 97. It is a fact of life. Did it ever prevent anyone from using Netscape? I know I can use it with out problem. Hell you even get a little pop up message asking if you are sure you want Netscape as your default browser. That doens't seem to be a bully. It seems like you were given a choice.
I will say this on a side note. There are more versions of Linux than there are of windows. You can't say MS gives you ulcers without agreeing you just got a kidney infection from the Linux selection out there. 30+ distros. Come on. That is a headache in itself. There isn't that many versions of Windows. Then again new versions are theorhetically better. 95,98,ME,XPhome... all newer and better versions than the last. Don't forget NT4, 2000, XP Pro. A nice simple selection. Not, Slackware linux, lindows, Debian, Suse, mandrake, red hat, etc etc etc. (I am not typing them all)
What I am saying is don't spread FUD if you are against it. Practice what your preach.
If you think about it... of all the people who are capable of hacking into high end servers. I will bet about 90 percent of that group run Linux, FreeBSD or some form of open-source software. Now the typical Linux fan also is a fan of Open Source and usually... almost always a hater or in some way is disgruntled towards Microsoft.
So why on earth would they hack a Linux server?
They would naturally attack the source of their grief. It is common sense. Of all the virii I have seen, I have only once seen a virus that attacked Linux and it was specifically Redhat Linux. However, for sometime, since Windows inception into the world as the main OS of use virii have spread wild like the fucking black plague. Linux... 1 that I have heard of.
I am not saying Linux has superior security, I am saying that Windows, is always being attacked. If you attack your "Enemy" long enough, weaknesses will be revealed. Windows could have just awesome security but everything has flaws. You can't walk around telling me Linux, which has been in BETA since the beginning of time, is more secure. You can't say it is less secure either. Because you don't have a source code comparison.
I don't think MS has bad security. I just think they are being attacked by (hack,crack,script)-ers more than they should be. Yeah it is a great way to get Linux to be the number one serving platform. You could also level the playing field by getting a few hundred people to sit around all day using vulverabilities in Linux to bring it to its knees.
I would... fucking buy an island in Fiji and retire dammit. For 40 billion dollars; screw the idea of going to work. Who cares at this point. Sell all your shares and retire. Let some other schmuck run the company. I mean come on, you can't do it forever. Take the wife and kids outta dodge and raise them in a fun environment where you do shit all day.
Well it depends on which directions they want to take. I mean, new and better operating systems. Hardware. Computers. In the computer industry the sky is the limit.
I know for a fact that they will never make their own computers like apple. It would destroy everything that they have built. As for new and better Operating Systems. Yes. Windows has gotten better over the years. Look at the evolution between 95 and 98 alone. 98 was better, you can't argue with that. It wasn't great but it was better. Then from NT3-NT5(aka 2000) It was better. A lot better. Now they have XP and I am sure they are working on somthing else that is even better.
They way I figure it. In the next 10 years or so Windows will be a worthy rival in the computer industry. Server side I am speaking. When it comes to client they win hands down. I know that comment is flame bait but hear me out. Not everyone is a computer geek. Most people who use computers are nearly computer illiterate. So windows is an obvious choice. Easy to use yet still has its flaws.
Anyways... The way I figure it. Microsoft will eventually create an Operating System that just rocks on every front. Then I think their next goal. (I can't be for certain on this) Is to connect the world. Similar to what NURVj tried to do in Antitrust. Make the world just connected one one global network. No dial up modems or DSL or cable... but one network. Homes would come with an ethernet standard built into them, like phone lines. You hook up your computer and you are in. I don't know if that is their intentions but it isn't a bad idea to where they might be headed.
I wouldn't call their subscription.NET model not a necessity. I remember pre-1997 when I didn't give a shit about computers or the internet. I had my Mac Classic which did everything I needed. Printed shit, played cheesy games etc. Then my grandfather got a computer with Windows 95 on it. He took me on a tour of the internet. What wasn't a necessity before became a need. After I gradutated I got a computer ahd headed off to college where I was connected morning, noon and night doing shit. It became a necessity..NET could also have the same effect in the long run. I mean they have put this much into it. I don't think they are gonna back out now and say "OOPS! Bad Idea!"
I don't think they will lobby politicians either. I think they will continue to do whatever it is that they do. Make over-priced software that almost everyone and their mom needs because it is the latest and greatest. I don't knwo where they are headed but I am sure in Mr. Gates office is a huge dry erase board with the model... ever changing.
Actually I was talking to a friend of mine who works for Microsoft. There was talk about this programmer who is working for them. I don't know his name but he was working on some project and certain entries took over 12 hours to preform. He had no idea what the dude was working on.
Then the talk continues with that this guy figured out how to make the entry time go from 12 hours to 3 hours. He did somthing with the code and yadda yadda yadda and now he was ripped out of the building he was working in and was moved over to building 8... Mr. Gates side of the campus. Now he meets with the man and his cronies once a week to discuss stuff about the company and blah blah blah.
I wonder if it has anything to do with this program actually. I mean it has to be somthing pretty serious.
This really isn't a violation of anyones rights. I know in our country it is innocent until proven guilty through a court of law. But why do most people, when they get pulled over by an officer of the law for speeding or what have you, pay the fine. You didn't go to court. You could have but you didn't.
I think these cameras are a great idea. It keeps honest people from risking lives. A yellow light doens't mean slam your foot on the gas. A yellow light means slow down and get ready to stop, unless it is too dangerous to slow down. Which is understandable in some situations but if you are going the speed limit it shouldn't be a problem.
Okay. I am not a die hard comic book reader. Infact the closest comic book I had to spiderman was spiderham. I can say this. I don't give a damn if they are organic webshooters or ropes strategically tied to buildings. The movie looks damn good and I am gonna go see it tomorrow. If you mean to tell me that the movie has to exactly follow the comics then don't go see the movie. If you are gonna complain about the stupidest little details then don't bother seeing the movie. I don't care if spiderman could make himself slippery or not. It is so minor to the over all comic it is pathetic. I seriously doubt Stan Lee, then man, dedicated a whole comic to explaining the whole slippery effect. He doesn't seem that cheesy. Besides, I read he liked it. He wrote the fucking comic so if he likes it then why shouldn't you? It was his idea along with a few others I am sure. It is his story you read so get over it. Please people... it is just a movie. A mere form of entertainment which will be rentable in 6 months.
As for Poole. He is a whiner. He seems upset that he never made it as an actor and the fact that 10 years after his movie that he worked so hard on they made another and he didn't get a part upset him. It happens... I mean, maybe he is just a shitty actor. I don't know. I am gonna go view the GGLS after I am done. He just needs to get over it. Hollywood does this and makes good money off it. Fuck him.
I still think Edward Norton and Julianne Moore would have made a better Peter Parker and Mary Jane. That or John Cusak. After all he has been doing Kickboxing since he did the film "Say Anything."
Which I am sure to do anyways but think about it. What are the chances of UFO's and life on other planets? Scientists in recent years have been searching our galaxy alone and still have not come up with one planet that could sustain life. Whether they be too hot or too cold, too many toxic gases or to undeveloped. The closest they have come is Mars, and after finding out life does not exist on Mars period, it was shot down. Not that Mars is really habitable anyways.. eg. hot, cold, etc.
Even SETI, have been scouring? the blackened abyss for just artificial radio waves, which could be signs of life existing else where, and what? Last time I checked, they found 19 possiblities that were so far decayed they were labeled... you guessed it... Possibilities.
ESP? Depends how you mean it. The ability to sense and talk with the dead? Or the ability to pick up on others thoughts? Or read minds, etc.... Why not in all honesty? I mean for those of you who are strict Darwinists or Evolususts or whatever the hell you are called. (Atheist?) Could human minds evolve to another level? To actually pick up on other human brain waves. Fuck the idea of talking to the dead. Bullshit... but the real ability to actually one day communicate through ones thoughts. I believe it. I wouldn't callit esp, nore like a psyonic-network. More like a wireless lan. So long as you are in range you can communicate. (that would be damn cool)
Now for the God topic.
How can people be called ignorant when there are facts that a man, created by God, came down and preached to thousands upon thousands. Documented proof of the existance of a man who could cure the blind. Raise the dead. Heal a cripple, etc. The most popular book ever sold is the bible. Granted its translation is inaccurate to some degree but it isn't just Cathloics and Mormons and Lutherans believing in one God. It is Muslims and buddhists? and countless other religions believing in just one entity that created us. We are talking billions of people here.
I mean documented alien existence. None. I eman real documentation. Eye witnesses. Real pictures, not that 70's forged crap. Video. Wide Spread encounter among a mass of people. If aliens really wanted to meet us they would make it well known. Not abductions. If they are "susposedly" intelligent creatures who travel light years to take a few humans for experimentation then they would have over thousands of years created a psychology for themselves. Being intelligent and all. Hence they would have some idea of how to say hi, how are you without creating wide spread panic.
You can't call someone ignorant for believing in God. Doing that would be the same as someone believing Linux will become a desktop standard in the next 100 years. You can't call them ignorant. What if they are right and Linux actually becomes Mom and Dad user friendly. Plug and Pray. Produced for the masses and found on cheap PC's. Part of every highschool computer lab. Part of every college dormatory. They aren't ignorant. Neither is someone who believes in God. Especially with all that happens to prove his existence. The Wounds of Christ. The documented destruction and rebuilding of a city. How scientists had to actually calculate into their equations for the original Apollo moon flights the fact that Earth stood still for an entire day. Real things that happened.
I am neither forcing my faith or opinions on anyone. I am merely saying don't call someone ignorant for believing in somthing that makes them happy.
Besides... here are two more interesting arguements that cause science to fail.
1. Why is it that when scientists calculate the movement of the Big Bang they can calculate it down to like 0.0^63 1 of a second but after that all functions of Quantum Physics and the math they use break down and don't work in the calculations and they are still trying to find a way to calculate it further? Seems kinda funny to me. (Saw that on UWTV)
2. Say they do calculate it down to ground zero. Here is another questions for you. What happened that formed the mass of energy that would become the big bang?
oh and here is a kicker.
If there is no God. And we are all evolved from ameoba and what not. In all honesty, if science is right and blah blah blah, when we die. Like a computer our mind will just turn to blackness. Nothing. A void. Not thought processes, nothing. Seems to me, that would suck. then again it couldn't realy suck because I wouldn't know it.
Open Source will never die. It will always remain. As will freeware. They will always be somewhere providinga service to someone. This is a constant.
Another constant, Windows. It will never die either. (Unless Macintosh starts selling like mad) Windows will always remain superior in the consumer market because it is easy to use. Imean if you actually look at how many geeks exist in relation to how many people know jack about computers. The geeks are a tiny slice of the pie. Mom and Dad, the old folks, want a simple system that works. That is what Microsoft provides. End of story. It is plain reality.
Maybe they jumped the gun a bit when they entered the server market. None-the-less their servers seem to work too. You can say oh, Linux is better, but honestly. Who really is to say. Linux has its purpose, Windows has theirs. Leave it be. You don't always have to be a hater.
Time travel. My big question is this. Where is it all stored. These events, these moments. Where is it kept this archive known as the past. It is not a physical entity that one can manipulate or encounter. The past is in our minds. It is what we remember.
The furture. It does not exist either, not to the degree where you can travel forward and see what is to become versus where we are headed. Because of free will. We can decide to go to work or stay home. We can decide anything at any given moment. If the future did exist and was an entity that you could see, and feel and hear. Then it would look exactly like chaos. Always changing because of free will. I didn't have to type this message and post it. I could press the close button on my browser right now and forget it all. Free will my brothers.
As for time existing. In my opinion. Time, the way we have always known it, does not exist as a real factor of anything. Time has measure only because we will it to have measure. Time was created as a countdown to ones death. (In essence) Time neither speeds up or slows down because it isn't really there. Not like gravity or magnetism or light. It is somthing we created as mortals. The atomic clock experiment. Think about it. You have a clock, relativly close to sea level, where gravity has a greater pull and there are more particles compacted together. Then you have this plane way up there further away from the earth. Equalling less gravity and less particals compacting it. Of course it is going to slow down. The atoms are more free to move. It is like throwing a baseball on the moon and on earth. Which will fly further? The one in the plane will slow down. In fact I bet, if you suspend an atomic clock high above in the stratospere and leave one on earth. The one suspended up high will slow down. Even without any movement in any given direction. This is common sense here.
We need to invest this kind of intelligence in something of more value. Like Kernel version 3.0. OR! a better energy drink! (Now I am getting sarcastic)
The quote that was presented at the beginning of the article is nice but come on! It is proprietory to MS and they have been less than forthcoming about changes they have made. And for good reason. They own the extensions. It is their OS. What are we gonna do hold them at gun point?
I remember when I was a kid they had this exact same thing made out of wood. It had twelve barrels and you could load dozens of rubberbands on it. All you did was crank the handle and it fired like a gattling gun. Talk about nostalgia.
Microsoft is not saying they can't seperate windows from the browser. They are saying they can't seperate WIn98 from the browser. I mean the thing was built nearly from the ground up when it came to the important aspects of it. Integrating IE5 was just a bonus feature. I mean I am sure there is a way, but why would they want too. Windows 98 is dead anyways.
Well saying a Web Server or an OS is super important is the same as hardware. After all Processors make it go! So if Microsoft has to open source their OS then Intel and AMD should totally open the architecture and schematic behind each of their lines of processors.
What seems important to many (eg. Web Server OS) means nothing to others. For example. My brother couldn't give a rip about a Web Server. All he cares about is how many frags he can accumulate in 10 seconds.
The reason so many people from this site are behind the whole open sourcing of Windows. (Which is still Windows 98, not any other OS) Is it would mean the near demise of Microsoft whom they all hate. God knows why!? I still can't fathom a hatred as deep as this one.
Just to summerize so I can go play EQ real quick.
Web Servers are only important to those who feel they are important. Same as Graphics cards, video games, and even cars. Frankly I think this whole case is stupid. Should never have happened. So if you are going to force a company to open-source their code. Then you have to make everyone else. Besides, in this case code isn't another form of documentation. Once it gets in the hands of Linux Geeks and is mirrored around the world. They are going to tweak and use the MS API in Linux and it will all be over for MS. That isn't fair competition. That is stooping to their level.
What I am saying is that this would have to apply to everyone then. nVidia would have to release the full schematic on their premiere GPU's. IBM would have to not only release source code for every piece of software, but for all schematics for the hardware they build too.
Oracle, (I am pretty sure they don't have it open source but I could be wrong, so don't flame me for this one) would have to release the code for their database manager.
GM would have to release the exact process in which they mold their engines.
ID Software would have to release the full source for every single FPS they make right at release like everyone else. (Not that they don't already but they do it eventually down the line)
I mean screw Viagra and Coke. Their products are consumed into the body. They rlease the exact recipe to the FDA to make sure no one is internally harmed by toxic chemicals they maybe in said products. That is a given.
Closed source OS code does not really harm anyone in a severe way that it would be dangerous to ones life. The only thing it causes is frustration among those who want it open. That is a fact. It is closed. So what. Who honestly cares!? If Linux is the more efficient and precise of the two sets of code. Then it will eventually prevail.
OS's are like cars in one aspect. Take Ford. They have been around longer than anyone person who reads this site. They have some of the best advertising and marketing strategies. Now lets say they build shitty cars. An individual will only buy the shitty car for so long before they realize that this company over here. Saturn. Makes better cars, that don't break down. That run forever maintenance free, etc. Granted they might not have the marketing and strategy but eventually people will switch to the better car.
Frankly, I think the code should remain closed. If it becomes open. What if it becomes better than your precious Linux. I mean what if with a few minor tweaks from Slackware Kernel Gods, the windows source code out preforms and destroys Linux. What then? Would you all switch to a Windows Distro? Since it turned out to be the better of the two because it was released open source. What about Linux? What about all you stood for?
Leave it closed. Let the competition flow between Open and closed source. Lets have a little fun and MS bash! Fuck the code. Only reason anyone would want it would be to get the code for the API. After that it would all be down hill. Linux wins, game over!
On a side note. I believe that Win98 could not run without IE at all. Hence they would have to trash 98. NOt every WinOS. NT and 98 are completely different. Some visual similarities but completely different OS's all together.
Of course every Linux user and their mom is going to go up in arms over a review. Especially when it attacks their OS of choice.
Vice versa man. If you had a windot.org site where peole ranted and raved against Linux and an article of the same magnitude came out. Then Windows users will do the exact same thing.
How about we try this. Why don't you just believe in what you know. Follow what you know is right. And for fucks sake, not get a hair up your ass and freak when a simple article says one is better than the other.
I mean I know we are children here but one would think that at some point you can just let go. Stop rolling your eyes and just say fuck it.
you don't feel secure. You don't feel the sense of, wow this plane won't blow up after all next time you enter O'hare. How is it a false sense? I feel very secure. Granted we were breeched this time, but I doubt it will happen again.
As for lets topple congress... that is a threat. It is a threat to national security since it is our means of government. Now in that paraphrase it may not seem like it. Now get 100 or 10,000 people saying that and action must be taken to protect the American way of life. It is treason.
You know I hate Hitler. I hate all that he stood for. But for a majority rule, they picked one fine leader. I mean if you actually put aside the horrific massacres he had performed, he managed to conquer nearly all of Europe and travel quite far in to Russia. He had his people in an uproar to fight. He brainwashed thousands. These actions of the majority for the time, for their ideals and what they intended to accomplish, picked the best leader for the job.
But now you have gone to far. You are skewing reality and what-if. No majority would ever vote to have an innocent shot. That is what is reason. Something real. The moral behind it all.
To end this all, What you call self defense during a riot I call retaliation for the wrong means. This guy Austin explained that basically fuck up the cops to protect your riot at hand. If Police action is necessary at a protest, then you have gone too far and began endangering the security and lives of people around you. If you start a riot, then you are stupid and civil action must take a hand. These are laws you agree to live by. He wasn't explaining self defense. He was explaining "How to pull a riot off in good form to injure if not kill a few cops to get a message across." There are peaceful means about this. Think about it.
Liberty I have. Security I have. Therefore I deserve both. I have not at any time traded one for the other.
Kinda redundant, don't you think? I bend to the people who wield the powers yet I think of my own personal ideals. One would think an individual who does bend to the power would also follow the ideals from which the power delegates.
Ghandi was a pacifist and yet he bowed down to no one. He completed his tasks in a peaceful manner. He is also maybe one of the greatest leaders in the past 200 years. If not further.
I am all for guns, don't get me wrong. But should any citizen of the United States be given the right no matter what history they carry with them. Technically an ex-murderer who has been reformed and been let off probation is now a citizen again. Does he have the right to carry a gun even though he may have shot or slaughtered 1,2 maybe 10 people. And if he does, how safe would you or anyone else feel in his presence? Frankly, unless used in conventional means such as war time or hunting, I think guns are for pussies. Anyone, such as yourself, who is gonna pack a gat and walk around like they are Stoop-dog scares the shit outta me. It would scare the shit outta anyone for fear of what they might do because in their own mind it is justifying a means to an end.
If the government is out to oppress me and you and everyone else, then why are so many happy with where they stand. I know I am, I have met many who are. If you feel oppressed then leave. If you feel that you are being controlled then leave. You aren't wanted on American soil if you feel that all this is happening and that the US is evil. Then again, all this is coming from a guy who goes by the screen name screwtheNSA.
So I take it you do not like our ways of running a country. If you hate it so bad then leave. You don't like how things go, then go to flipping Mexico.
You can't hate it that bad if you still live here.
Oh I am sure wars wouldn't exist. Maybe not on the scale we have seen but there would be. How would you justify anything? Say for example we had no government. No Government = No laws. You come home one day in your peaceful utopia and you have about 15 guys moving stuff out of your house. They are robbing your house. They are taking every possession you own. You see them and lets just say, they are your neighbors. How are you going to get justice? Who will stand with you when it is 15 people against you? Their word against yours.
Or worse... you are driving and someone really likes your car and wants it. They are gonna take it and there won't be any police officers there to protect you.
Granted, I have to admit, I would love a world where whatever wage i earned, I kept and was tax free. A world where I could claim my own property and build my own house with out zoning laws. I could speed down a lone-highway and not fear a cop is hiding and just waiting for a punk like me. That would be awesome! Where nothing I did could get oppressed. If I wrote a book, people wouldn't have the right to have it banned from their libraries.
We can't have this world. We can't go without a government. There has to be an order. There ahs to be a set way of doing things and a set of rules one follows. Because if we did away with it, as much as I like to see the good in people. Most will switch to their primal, every man for themselves. Instinct will over-ride common sense. Our Id will rule and our super-ego and ego will be over-written.
Because I tell ya, I am a pacifist? by nature. I don't fight, I might argue, but I avoid physical confrontation at all costs. If we slipped into a world without a government, I will be one of the first ones to look out for number 1. Me and my family, no one else. I would die protecting them. That is a world I don't want to live in.
I said it before and I will say it again. People don't want freedom, they want security. If I can go to bed at night knowing the government is spending over a trillion on defense just to keep my country and my rights protected. Then let them. It is better than the alternative.
Those anti-governments, whom i refer to as our founding fathers fought for an entirly different purpose. It was the definition of oppression. Did you actually read the history books. They couldn't speak an opinion without the fear of Englands retribution. Our Country, Our Government allows us to speak our mind. So long as your opinions aren't threats against another citizen of this country.
I won't argue when you say the people who run this country are money grubbing whores. But those people who are there, in office, are there for one reason only. Our vote. The majority vote. These whores you speak of our there out of our own desire. Maybe you didn't vote for them, or your neighbor, but a majority did. A majority of people said "Gee, I like this guy... lets make him our decision maker, our voice on high."
I also never said having an opinion is a crime. I said having an opinion that is a threat to another person, or worse our country is a crime. Think about it. How would you feel if you had an idea and I got in your face and said, your idea sucks sit down or I will snap your neck. And really meant my words. You woudn't like it. Neither would I if you did the same to me. You have to admit, for even a brief second you would feel threatened. However, say you have have an idea and I say, I disagree, I think it is a terrible idea. Then that is an expression of an opinion. Not an idle threat to your sanctity of well being.
They also didn't ban guns. If they did, I woudn't have my rifle that I use every year to go hunting. They may have put restrictions on them. They may have made it harder for you to carry a gun on your person without some legal barriers you have to climb across. In this day and age, I feel that is a good thing. Last thing I need is Stoop-Dog fronting me because I danced with his sister and he pulls a gat and sticks it to my forehead.
As for the dissenter. If he wanted to rally with terrorist, he should have gotten citizenship in that country. Not remained a citizen of ours and fought against us. That is treason and he should be hung. It would be the same as a Vietnam protester flying to Vietnam, joining the viet-cong and shooting at our boys.
You have to take in account people don't just want freedom. They want security.
Slashdot Mirror
Now the company that makes tape decks decides to charge manufacturers for a tape deck in every stereo they produce, even if it only comes with a record player.
I see you are doing an an analogy here. I see whre you are taking it but what is a record player an analogy of? I need some detail here because that is just confusing.
Most consumers want to have tape decks so there is nothing the stereo producers can do unless they want to spend twice as much for the tape decks, and if they don't put a tape deck in the stereo anyway, they'll have to pay for it so they go ahead.
This is one of the points I have been trying to make. Consumers want windows. I am glad you concur.
Now imagine that another company invents the CD player. The quality is better, the CDs last longer, and you can skip between songs. But no manufacturers produce stereos with CD players because they would have to pay the other company for the tape deck anyway. In addition to paying for the CD player, you'd be paying the first company for the Tape player even though the stereo had a CD player instead. Who would buy these stereos that cost twice as much and don't support the readily available audio tapes? What company would produce CDs when so few people had the equipment to play them?
What the hell are you trying to say here? You lost me with this paragraph. I tried to take it apart but it does not make any sense. I assume that the Tape Player is still Windows and now I naturally assume the CD Player is Linux. But if a company that makes computers wants to have a CD player instead of a tape player they could install the CD player without having to pay for the tape player ever again. Then again they lose their market because everyone wants tapes and a tape player. Am I even following you here? What happened to record players?
And the equalizer comment also didn't make a lot of sense. But here I go. I assume that the equalizer is a web browser. What you are trying to say I suppose is that there are better browsers out there because of the 10 band 5 band analogy. But companies can't bundle other equalizers with the tape deck? Are you smoking crack? I have seen OEM's install Netscape right along side Explorer. Nothing wrong with that.
So I really can't post anymore because... you analogy was bad and didn't flow. So I will end on this note. Find a better analogy so I can start and intellectual debate with you or don't post at all. My god... I feel dumber for just reading that.
This whole case is a joke. I mean seriously. Microsoft is a buisness. Buisnesses are created to generate revenue, i.e. money. When one has a good idea and goes with it. Others think the idea is good and come up with there own leagal versions creating competition. How else do you kill competition? You result to The Art of War. You go about legal means to get the point across that you are the better of the competition.
Microsoft has done precisely this. They have followed Sun Tzu's teachings like any "good" business prfofessional would do. Business is war. Capitalism is war. Survival of the fittest. No holds barred anything goes so long as you win. What you call strong-arm tactics and bullying, I call fighting a battle. How else would Microsoft have the money they have if they didn't make the deals with the OEM's.
You can say they threatened OEM's all you want. I Don't think any threats really happened. You are blowing this up to somthing it never was. Take this for an example. You own a company. What you do is sell computers to consumers. You originally sign an agreement with Microsoft to have Windows installed on your systems. In this agreement you agree to a series of terms that give you the ability to have Windows in all its form and grace. Now you decide down the road you want to break a few of these terms. Microsoft is going to respond with, "if you do this you will be in violation of our agreement and hence will be taken to court because we had a valid contract that you agreed upon."
This isn't a threat. This is simply Microsoft enforcing the rules you agreed upon. YOu break the rules and you lose your license to Windows and MS and you go outta business. Slow death. You could run Linux on all your systems, but most OEM's deal with consumers who are typically computer morons, so showcasing an OS that #1 isn't an industry client standard and #2 wouldn't run the applications that are compatible with the standard. What I mean by that is, you have kids who want to play the latest Warcraft 3 for example... you go buy it but can't get the damn thing installed because you are computer illiterate and have no idea what OS you got. ALl you know is it looks pretty and has a penguin as its mascot.
Slow death.
You can call Microsoft anything you want, but it will never change their position in the market as #1. It doesn't matter how many peoples opinions you change. Linux isn't a client standard like Windows is and never will be. The only head way Linux will make is as a workstation or as a server but never on the client level. Clients are rulled by the computer illiterate who want somthing that works and has great Product Support for their volume. (Stop, read that last sentence again so you don't freak out and go OMG, WTF, HDH)
Well that is all I really have to say but on a closing note. Ever notice how communistic pure OSS individuals are. Everything free, everything equal. Communists had this ideaology. Where if your neighbor had a car, you had a car. If they had a house, you had a house. Now really think about this one. Communism doesn't work that well. If you have doubts about that. Go back and read your history books.
ANd the number one website to fling more FUD in an hour than a billion dollar company can do in a 3 month period.
SLASHDOT.ORG
Go check it out today and see all the fear, uncertainty and doubt that just mutters... "LOOK AT ME... LOOK AT ME!"
"LOOK WHAT I CAN DO!"
Muwhahahahahahaha!
I mean in all honesty how can you honestly prove microsoft has stolen code as many times as you seem to say they have. This seems like FUD. That is right... YOU are slinging gobs of FUD. (I can use bold case too)
Where is your proof? Where is your cold hard evidence that this is happening? Over and over and over. I am not kidding. I sure don't see any. What I see is a generalization. A mere idea that this is happening. You don't have any real proof. I mean if this were happening large companies like IBM, Digital, SCO, Pen Conputing and Mircografx would sue and win because plagerization is illegal. Not kidding. IBM is a power house and would sue the shit outta Microsoft for a nice little cut of the pie. You cannot deny this. IF! it was even happening.
See what you are is a Linux adovocate. All open source or nothing at all. What irritates me about people like you is how damn happy and excited you get when shit hits the fan against a company that you dislike. I mean, it doesn't have any direct effect on your life. What Microsoft does doesn't affect how you live, breathe, eat or drink. You are an Open Source guy. You are all about it. So who cares what Microsoft does. It isn't going to affect Linux at all. Not in your eyes. Because from every angle, you view Linux as a superior OS. Above the rest. The pinnacle of OS evolution. Well yippee for you! I am happy that you are happy. Ecstatic even. I also think you are full of negativity if you can take that much time to write a post that totally attacks somthing that doesn't effect you in any way at all.
The only time you might feel the push is when Microsoft reclaims the portion of the server market they lost. They will get it back. I can tell you why to. It has nothing to do with Windows. It has to do with War. A war is being fought and I can guarentee, unless the "judge" decides to split the company. They will reclaim their throne. It is how they fight. YOu think they are just gonna sit there and watch Linux take over. If you do think that, you are kidding yourself. No way. Won't happen.
I am not a Microsoft advocate, I am a realist. And reality is a bitter-sweet idea. Suck it up. IBM doesn't have the leg room to move Linux to the ground it needs to be on. COnsidering COmpaq and HP merged. A new dawn is coming. Watch out. Fight all you want but Microsoft has an edge that Open Source doesn't. They have your source code, and you don't have theirs.
You guys always bitch about MS spreading FUD, but this (above) comment is FUD.
You can't knock it until you try it. Windows comes with IE, it has since 97. It is a fact of life. Did it ever prevent anyone from using Netscape? I know I can use it with out problem. Hell you even get a little pop up message asking if you are sure you want Netscape as your default browser. That doens't seem to be a bully. It seems like you were given a choice.
I will say this on a side note. There are more versions of Linux than there are of windows. You can't say MS gives you ulcers without agreeing you just got a kidney infection from the Linux selection out there. 30+ distros. Come on. That is a headache in itself. There isn't that many versions of Windows. Then again new versions are theorhetically better. 95,98,ME,XPhome... all newer and better versions than the last. Don't forget NT4, 2000, XP Pro. A nice simple selection. Not, Slackware linux, lindows, Debian, Suse, mandrake, red hat, etc etc etc. (I am not typing them all)
What I am saying is don't spread FUD if you are against it. Practice what your preach.
If you think about it... of all the people who are capable of hacking into high end servers. I will bet about 90 percent of that group run Linux, FreeBSD or some form of open-source software. Now the typical Linux fan also is a fan of Open Source and usually... almost always a hater or in some way is disgruntled towards Microsoft.
So why on earth would they hack a Linux server?
They would naturally attack the source of their grief. It is common sense. Of all the virii I have seen, I have only once seen a virus that attacked Linux and it was specifically Redhat Linux. However, for sometime, since Windows inception into the world as the main OS of use virii have spread wild like the fucking black plague. Linux... 1 that I have heard of.
I am not saying Linux has superior security, I am saying that Windows, is always being attacked. If you attack your "Enemy" long enough, weaknesses will be revealed. Windows could have just awesome security but everything has flaws. You can't walk around telling me Linux, which has been in BETA since the beginning of time, is more secure. You can't say it is less secure either. Because you don't have a source code comparison.
I don't think MS has bad security. I just think they are being attacked by (hack,crack,script)-ers more than they should be. Yeah it is a great way to get Linux to be the number one serving platform. You could also level the playing field by getting a few hundred people to sit around all day using vulverabilities in Linux to bring it to its knees.
It is a relative.
I would... fucking buy an island in Fiji and retire dammit. For 40 billion dollars; screw the idea of going to work. Who cares at this point. Sell all your shares and retire. Let some other schmuck run the company. I mean come on, you can't do it forever. Take the wife and kids outta dodge and raise them in a fun environment where you do shit all day.
Well it depends on which directions they want to take. I mean, new and better operating systems. Hardware. Computers. In the computer industry the sky is the limit.
.NET model not a necessity. I remember pre-1997 when I didn't give a shit about computers or the internet. I had my Mac Classic which did everything I needed. Printed shit, played cheesy games etc. Then my grandfather got a computer with Windows 95 on it. He took me on a tour of the internet. What wasn't a necessity before became a need. After I gradutated I got a computer ahd headed off to college where I was connected morning, noon and night doing shit. It became a necessity. .NET could also have the same effect in the long run. I mean they have put this much into it. I don't think they are gonna back out now and say "OOPS! Bad Idea!"
I know for a fact that they will never make their own computers like apple. It would destroy everything that they have built. As for new and better Operating Systems. Yes. Windows has gotten better over the years. Look at the evolution between 95 and 98 alone. 98 was better, you can't argue with that. It wasn't great but it was better. Then from NT3-NT5(aka 2000) It was better. A lot better. Now they have XP and I am sure they are working on somthing else that is even better.
They way I figure it. In the next 10 years or so Windows will be a worthy rival in the computer industry. Server side I am speaking. When it comes to client they win hands down. I know that comment is flame bait but hear me out. Not everyone is a computer geek. Most people who use computers are nearly computer illiterate. So windows is an obvious choice. Easy to use yet still has its flaws.
Anyways... The way I figure it. Microsoft will eventually create an Operating System that just rocks on every front. Then I think their next goal. (I can't be for certain on this) Is to connect the world. Similar to what NURVj tried to do in Antitrust. Make the world just connected one one global network. No dial up modems or DSL or cable... but one network. Homes would come with an ethernet standard built into them, like phone lines. You hook up your computer and you are in. I don't know if that is their intentions but it isn't a bad idea to where they might be headed.
I wouldn't call their subscription
I don't think they will lobby politicians either. I think they will continue to do whatever it is that they do. Make over-priced software that almost everyone and their mom needs because it is the latest and greatest. I don't knwo where they are headed but I am sure in Mr. Gates office is a huge dry erase board with the model... ever changing.
Whoever said Microsoft created the program?
Actually I was talking to a friend of mine who works for Microsoft. There was talk about this programmer who is working for them. I don't know his name but he was working on some project and certain entries took over 12 hours to preform. He had no idea what the dude was working on.
Then the talk continues with that this guy figured out how to make the entry time go from 12 hours to 3 hours. He did somthing with the code and yadda yadda yadda and now he was ripped out of the building he was working in and was moved over to building 8... Mr. Gates side of the campus. Now he meets with the man and his cronies once a week to discuss stuff about the company and blah blah blah.
I wonder if it has anything to do with this program actually. I mean it has to be somthing pretty serious.
dig money...
Well the kinda chicks that would double up on a dude like me do.
This really isn't a violation of anyones rights. I know in our country it is innocent until proven guilty through a court of law. But why do most people, when they get pulled over by an officer of the law for speeding or what have you, pay the fine. You didn't go to court. You could have but you didn't.
I think these cameras are a great idea. It keeps honest people from risking lives. A yellow light doens't mean slam your foot on the gas. A yellow light means slow down and get ready to stop, unless it is too dangerous to slow down. Which is understandable in some situations but if you are going the speed limit it shouldn't be a problem.
Okay. I am not a die hard comic book reader. Infact the closest comic book I had to spiderman was spiderham. I can say this. I don't give a damn if they are organic webshooters or ropes strategically tied to buildings. The movie looks damn good and I am gonna go see it tomorrow. If you mean to tell me that the movie has to exactly follow the comics then don't go see the movie. If you are gonna complain about the stupidest little details then don't bother seeing the movie. I don't care if spiderman could make himself slippery or not. It is so minor to the over all comic it is pathetic. I seriously doubt Stan Lee, then man, dedicated a whole comic to explaining the whole slippery effect. He doesn't seem that cheesy. Besides, I read he liked it. He wrote the fucking comic so if he likes it then why shouldn't you? It was his idea along with a few others I am sure. It is his story you read so get over it. Please people... it is just a movie. A mere form of entertainment which will be rentable in 6 months.
As for Poole. He is a whiner. He seems upset that he never made it as an actor and the fact that 10 years after his movie that he worked so hard on they made another and he didn't get a part upset him. It happens... I mean, maybe he is just a shitty actor. I don't know. I am gonna go view the GGLS after I am done. He just needs to get over it. Hollywood does this and makes good money off it. Fuck him.
I still think Edward Norton and Julianne Moore would have made a better Peter Parker and Mary Jane. That or John Cusak. After all he has been doing Kickboxing since he did the film "Say Anything."
Which I am sure to do anyways but think about it. What are the chances of UFO's and life on other planets? Scientists in recent years have been searching our galaxy alone and still have not come up with one planet that could sustain life. Whether they be too hot or too cold, too many toxic gases or to undeveloped. The closest they have come is Mars, and after finding out life does not exist on Mars period, it was shot down. Not that Mars is really habitable anyways.. eg. hot, cold, etc.
Even SETI, have been scouring? the blackened abyss for just artificial radio waves, which could be signs of life existing else where, and what? Last time I checked, they found 19 possiblities that were so far decayed they were labeled... you guessed it... Possibilities.
ESP? Depends how you mean it. The ability to sense and talk with the dead? Or the ability to pick up on others thoughts? Or read minds, etc.... Why not in all honesty? I mean for those of you who are strict Darwinists or Evolususts or whatever the hell you are called. (Atheist?) Could human minds evolve to another level? To actually pick up on other human brain waves. Fuck the idea of talking to the dead. Bullshit... but the real ability to actually one day communicate through ones thoughts. I believe it. I wouldn't callit esp, nore like a psyonic-network. More like a wireless lan. So long as you are in range you can communicate. (that would be damn cool)
Now for the God topic.
How can people be called ignorant when there are facts that a man, created by God, came down and preached to thousands upon thousands. Documented proof of the existance of a man who could cure the blind. Raise the dead. Heal a cripple, etc. The most popular book ever sold is the bible. Granted its translation is inaccurate to some degree but it isn't just Cathloics and Mormons and Lutherans believing in one God. It is Muslims and buddhists? and countless other religions believing in just one entity that created us. We are talking billions of people here.
I mean documented alien existence. None. I eman real documentation. Eye witnesses. Real pictures, not that 70's forged crap. Video. Wide Spread encounter among a mass of people. If aliens really wanted to meet us they would make it well known. Not abductions. If they are "susposedly" intelligent creatures who travel light years to take a few humans for experimentation then they would have over thousands of years created a psychology for themselves. Being intelligent and all. Hence they would have some idea of how to say hi, how are you without creating wide spread panic.
You can't call someone ignorant for believing in God. Doing that would be the same as someone believing Linux will become a desktop standard in the next 100 years. You can't call them ignorant. What if they are right and Linux actually becomes Mom and Dad user friendly. Plug and Pray. Produced for the masses and found on cheap PC's. Part of every highschool computer lab. Part of every college dormatory. They aren't ignorant. Neither is someone who believes in God. Especially with all that happens to prove his existence. The Wounds of Christ. The documented destruction and rebuilding of a city. How scientists had to actually calculate into their equations for the original Apollo moon flights the fact that Earth stood still for an entire day. Real things that happened.
I am neither forcing my faith or opinions on anyone. I am merely saying don't call someone ignorant for believing in somthing that makes them happy.
Besides... here are two more interesting arguements that cause science to fail.
1. Why is it that when scientists calculate the movement of the Big Bang they can calculate it down to like 0.0^63 1 of a second but after that all functions of Quantum Physics and the math they use break down and don't work in the calculations and they are still trying to find a way to calculate it further? Seems kinda funny to me. (Saw that on UWTV)
2. Say they do calculate it down to ground zero. Here is another questions for you. What happened that formed the mass of energy that would become the big bang?
oh and here is a kicker.
If there is no God. And we are all evolved from ameoba and what not. In all honesty, if science is right and blah blah blah, when we die. Like a computer our mind will just turn to blackness. Nothing. A void. Not thought processes, nothing. Seems to me, that would suck. then again it couldn't realy suck because I wouldn't know it.
a "weak attempt" seems more suitable.
Open Source will never die. It will always remain. As will freeware. They will always be somewhere providinga service to someone. This is a constant.
Another constant, Windows. It will never die either. (Unless Macintosh starts selling like mad) Windows will always remain superior in the consumer market because it is easy to use. Imean if you actually look at how many geeks exist in relation to how many people know jack about computers. The geeks are a tiny slice of the pie. Mom and Dad, the old folks, want a simple system that works. That is what Microsoft provides. End of story. It is plain reality.
Maybe they jumped the gun a bit when they entered the server market. None-the-less their servers seem to work too. You can say oh, Linux is better, but honestly. Who really is to say. Linux has its purpose, Windows has theirs. Leave it be. You don't always have to be a hater.
Time travel. My big question is this. Where is it all stored. These events, these moments. Where is it kept this archive known as the past. It is not a physical entity that one can manipulate or encounter. The past is in our minds. It is what we remember.
The furture. It does not exist either, not to the degree where you can travel forward and see what is to become versus where we are headed. Because of free will. We can decide to go to work or stay home. We can decide anything at any given moment. If the future did exist and was an entity that you could see, and feel and hear. Then it would look exactly like chaos. Always changing because of free will. I didn't have to type this message and post it. I could press the close button on my browser right now and forget it all. Free will my brothers.
As for time existing. In my opinion. Time, the way we have always known it, does not exist as a real factor of anything. Time has measure only because we will it to have measure. Time was created as a countdown to ones death. (In essence) Time neither speeds up or slows down because it isn't really there. Not like gravity or magnetism or light. It is somthing we created as mortals. The atomic clock experiment. Think about it. You have a clock, relativly close to sea level, where gravity has a greater pull and there are more particles compacted together. Then you have this plane way up there further away from the earth. Equalling less gravity and less particals compacting it. Of course it is going to slow down. The atoms are more free to move. It is like throwing a baseball on the moon and on earth. Which will fly further? The one in the plane will slow down. In fact I bet, if you suspend an atomic clock high above in the stratospere and leave one on earth. The one suspended up high will slow down. Even without any movement in any given direction. This is common sense here.
We need to invest this kind of intelligence in something of more value. Like Kernel version 3.0. OR! a better energy drink! (Now I am getting sarcastic)
The quote that was presented at the beginning of the article is nice but come on! It is proprietory to MS and they have been less than forthcoming about changes they have made. And for good reason. They own the extensions. It is their OS. What are we gonna do hold them at gun point?
Give us your extensions o' glutton of stock
I remember when I was a kid they had this exact same thing made out of wood. It had twelve barrels and you could load dozens of rubberbands on it. All you did was crank the handle and it fired like a gattling gun. Talk about nostalgia.
Microsoft is not saying they can't seperate windows from the browser. They are saying they can't seperate WIn98 from the browser. I mean the thing was built nearly from the ground up when it came to the important aspects of it. Integrating IE5 was just a bonus feature. I mean I am sure there is a way, but why would they want too. Windows 98 is dead anyways.
Well saying a Web Server or an OS is super important is the same as hardware. After all Processors make it go! So if Microsoft has to open source their OS then Intel and AMD should totally open the architecture and schematic behind each of their lines of processors.
What seems important to many (eg. Web Server OS) means nothing to others. For example. My brother couldn't give a rip about a Web Server. All he cares about is how many frags he can accumulate in 10 seconds.
The reason so many people from this site are behind the whole open sourcing of Windows. (Which is still Windows 98, not any other OS) Is it would mean the near demise of Microsoft whom they all hate. God knows why!? I still can't fathom a hatred as deep as this one.
Just to summerize so I can go play EQ real quick.
Web Servers are only important to those who feel they are important. Same as Graphics cards, video games, and even cars. Frankly I think this whole case is stupid. Should never have happened. So if you are going to force a company to open-source their code. Then you have to make everyone else. Besides, in this case code isn't another form of documentation. Once it gets in the hands of Linux Geeks and is mirrored around the world. They are going to tweak and use the MS API in Linux and it will all be over for MS. That isn't fair competition. That is stooping to their level.
What I am saying is that this would have to apply to everyone then. nVidia would have to release the full schematic on their premiere GPU's. IBM would have to not only release source code for every piece of software, but for all schematics for the hardware they build too.
Oracle, (I am pretty sure they don't have it open source but I could be wrong, so don't flame me for this one) would have to release the code for their database manager.
GM would have to release the exact process in which they mold their engines.
ID Software would have to release the full source for every single FPS they make right at release like everyone else. (Not that they don't already but they do it eventually down the line)
I mean screw Viagra and Coke. Their products are consumed into the body. They rlease the exact recipe to the FDA to make sure no one is internally harmed by toxic chemicals they maybe in said products. That is a given.
Closed source OS code does not really harm anyone in a severe way that it would be dangerous to ones life. The only thing it causes is frustration among those who want it open. That is a fact. It is closed. So what. Who honestly cares!? If Linux is the more efficient and precise of the two sets of code. Then it will eventually prevail.
OS's are like cars in one aspect. Take Ford. They have been around longer than anyone person who reads this site. They have some of the best advertising and marketing strategies. Now lets say they build shitty cars. An individual will only buy the shitty car for so long before they realize that this company over here. Saturn. Makes better cars, that don't break down. That run forever maintenance free, etc. Granted they might not have the marketing and strategy but eventually people will switch to the better car.
Frankly, I think the code should remain closed. If it becomes open. What if it becomes better than your precious Linux. I mean what if with a few minor tweaks from Slackware Kernel Gods, the windows source code out preforms and destroys Linux. What then? Would you all switch to a Windows Distro? Since it turned out to be the better of the two because it was released open source. What about Linux? What about all you stood for?
Leave it closed. Let the competition flow between Open and closed source. Lets have a little fun and MS bash! Fuck the code. Only reason anyone would want it would be to get the code for the API. After that it would all be down hill. Linux wins, game over!
On a side note. I believe that Win98 could not run without IE at all. Hence they would have to trash 98. NOt every WinOS. NT and 98 are completely different. Some visual similarities but completely different OS's all together.
I think this is totally biased.
Of course every Linux user and their mom is going to go up in arms over a review. Especially when it attacks their OS of choice.
Vice versa man. If you had a windot.org site where peole ranted and raved against Linux and an article of the same magnitude came out. Then Windows users will do the exact same thing.
How about we try this. Why don't you just believe in what you know. Follow what you know is right. And for fucks sake, not get a hair up your ass and freak when a simple article says one is better than the other.
I mean I know we are children here but one would think that at some point you can just let go. Stop rolling your eyes and just say fuck it.
you don't feel secure. You don't feel the sense of, wow this plane won't blow up after all next time you enter O'hare. How is it a false sense? I feel very secure. Granted we were breeched this time, but I doubt it will happen again.
As for lets topple congress... that is a threat. It is a threat to national security since it is our means of government. Now in that paraphrase it may not seem like it. Now get 100 or 10,000 people saying that and action must be taken to protect the American way of life. It is treason.
You know I hate Hitler. I hate all that he stood for. But for a majority rule, they picked one fine leader. I mean if you actually put aside the horrific massacres he had performed, he managed to conquer nearly all of Europe and travel quite far in to Russia. He had his people in an uproar to fight. He brainwashed thousands. These actions of the majority for the time, for their ideals and what they intended to accomplish, picked the best leader for the job.
But now you have gone to far. You are skewing reality and what-if. No majority would ever vote to have an innocent shot. That is what is reason. Something real. The moral behind it all.
To end this all, What you call self defense during a riot I call retaliation for the wrong means. This guy Austin explained that basically fuck up the cops to protect your riot at hand. If Police action is necessary at a protest, then you have gone too far and began endangering the security and lives of people around you. If you start a riot, then you are stupid and civil action must take a hand. These are laws you agree to live by. He wasn't explaining self defense. He was explaining "How to pull a riot off in good form to injure if not kill a few cops to get a message across." There are peaceful means about this. Think about it.
Liberty I have. Security I have. Therefore I deserve both. I have not at any time traded one for the other.
Kinda redundant, don't you think? I bend to the people who wield the powers yet I think of my own personal ideals. One would think an individual who does bend to the power would also follow the ideals from which the power delegates.
Ghandi was a pacifist and yet he bowed down to no one. He completed his tasks in a peaceful manner. He is also maybe one of the greatest leaders in the past 200 years. If not further.
I am all for guns, don't get me wrong. But should any citizen of the United States be given the right no matter what history they carry with them. Technically an ex-murderer who has been reformed and been let off probation is now a citizen again. Does he have the right to carry a gun even though he may have shot or slaughtered 1,2 maybe 10 people. And if he does, how safe would you or anyone else feel in his presence? Frankly, unless used in conventional means such as war time or hunting, I think guns are for pussies. Anyone, such as yourself, who is gonna pack a gat and walk around like they are Stoop-dog scares the shit outta me. It would scare the shit outta anyone for fear of what they might do because in their own mind it is justifying a means to an end.
If the government is out to oppress me and you and everyone else, then why are so many happy with where they stand. I know I am, I have met many who are. If you feel oppressed then leave. If you feel that you are being controlled then leave. You aren't wanted on American soil if you feel that all this is happening and that the US is evil. Then again, all this is coming from a guy who goes by the screen name screwtheNSA.
So I take it you do not like our ways of running a country. If you hate it so bad then leave. You don't like how things go, then go to flipping Mexico.
You can't hate it that bad if you still live here.
Oh I am sure wars wouldn't exist. Maybe not on the scale we have seen but there would be. How would you justify anything? Say for example we had no government. No Government = No laws. You come home one day in your peaceful utopia and you have about 15 guys moving stuff out of your house. They are robbing your house. They are taking every possession you own. You see them and lets just say, they are your neighbors. How are you going to get justice? Who will stand with you when it is 15 people against you? Their word against yours.
Or worse... you are driving and someone really likes your car and wants it. They are gonna take it and there won't be any police officers there to protect you.
Granted, I have to admit, I would love a world where whatever wage i earned, I kept and was tax free. A world where I could claim my own property and build my own house with out zoning laws. I could speed down a lone-highway and not fear a cop is hiding and just waiting for a punk like me. That would be awesome! Where nothing I did could get oppressed. If I wrote a book, people wouldn't have the right to have it banned from their libraries.
We can't have this world. We can't go without a government. There has to be an order. There ahs to be a set way of doing things and a set of rules one follows. Because if we did away with it, as much as I like to see the good in people. Most will switch to their primal, every man for themselves. Instinct will over-ride common sense. Our Id will rule and our super-ego and ego will be over-written.
Because I tell ya, I am a pacifist? by nature. I don't fight, I might argue, but I avoid physical confrontation at all costs. If we slipped into a world without a government, I will be one of the first ones to look out for number 1. Me and my family, no one else. I would die protecting them. That is a world I don't want to live in.
I said it before and I will say it again. People don't want freedom, they want security. If I can go to bed at night knowing the government is spending over a trillion on defense just to keep my country and my rights protected. Then let them. It is better than the alternative.
Those anti-governments, whom i refer to as our founding fathers fought for an entirly different purpose. It was the definition of oppression. Did you actually read the history books. They couldn't speak an opinion without the fear of Englands retribution. Our Country, Our Government allows us to speak our mind. So long as your opinions aren't threats against another citizen of this country.
I won't argue when you say the people who run this country are money grubbing whores. But those people who are there, in office, are there for one reason only. Our vote. The majority vote. These whores you speak of our there out of our own desire. Maybe you didn't vote for them, or your neighbor, but a majority did. A majority of people said "Gee, I like this guy... lets make him our decision maker, our voice on high."
I also never said having an opinion is a crime. I said having an opinion that is a threat to another person, or worse our country is a crime. Think about it. How would you feel if you had an idea and I got in your face and said, your idea sucks sit down or I will snap your neck. And really meant my words. You woudn't like it. Neither would I if you did the same to me. You have to admit, for even a brief second you would feel threatened. However, say you have have an idea and I say, I disagree, I think it is a terrible idea. Then that is an expression of an opinion. Not an idle threat to your sanctity of well being.
They also didn't ban guns. If they did, I woudn't have my rifle that I use every year to go hunting. They may have put restrictions on them. They may have made it harder for you to carry a gun on your person without some legal barriers you have to climb across. In this day and age, I feel that is a good thing. Last thing I need is Stoop-Dog fronting me because I danced with his sister and he pulls a gat and sticks it to my forehead.
As for the dissenter. If he wanted to rally with terrorist, he should have gotten citizenship in that country. Not remained a citizen of ours and fought against us. That is treason and he should be hung. It would be the same as a Vietnam protester flying to Vietnam, joining the viet-cong and shooting at our boys.
You have to take in account people don't just want freedom. They want security.