It would be nice if it worked like that, but sadly it's not about sales, or even piracy; it's about media/medium control. Right now the p2p networks -for better or for worse- are acting as the only balancing factor to the mafiaa's monopoly (please don't trot out emusic and other fringe crap; it's not an alternative if it doesn't provide what the people want-and the people don't want shitty rap, shitty folk or shitty emo music).
If you eliminated pirating and the p2p networks, it's more likely that controls would increase as the mafiaa sought to solidify their monopoly and prevent any future economic disruptions.
Re:FUD - ReactOs is legal
on
ReactOS Revealed
·
· Score: 2, Informative
They don't have to get a ruling. They can shut it down for the duration of the trail and make it effectively illegal to host or distribute in any country where the US has any economic influence. That's the US, Austrailia, India and Europe, and parts of Asia
I ordered the media kit dvd on the 2nd and got it in the mail today.
Re:Please don't forget that this is an alpha stage
on
ReactOS 0.3.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
No one has ever gone after MS's meat and potatoes before. Also, what do you think MS is preparing to do with all the patent noise over "linux IP violations"?
Re:Please don't forget that this is an alpha stage
on
ReactOS 0.3.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
a) by the time ReactOS is usable, there will be. Also, american law is enforcable overseas; cf AllOfMp3 closure and The Pirate Bay raids.
b) you're assuming that they'll be acting alone; they have novell's help on the Linux front, and slapping a Cease-And-Desist on ReactOS would be trivial.
c)the only thing useable in an antitrust suit would be the undocumented apis...which have nothing to do with ReactOS. Anything done in ReactOS can easily be found and studied via MSDN.
mod my comments down all you like, but it's a fact that once ReactOS becomes any sort of threat (real or percieved) to Microsoft, Microsoft will break out the lawyers and the software patent lawsuits.
Hide your heads in the sand all you want to...it's your time you're wasting, not mine.
>If React OS can keep me running my current Windows apps in a sensible, secure, and supported environment, then I can avoid Vista. That means less headaches, and less expense.
Which is exactly why Microsoft will dig deep into it's legal fund and patent portfolio and nuke reactos off the face of the planet the very second that ReactOS becomes a practical alternative to Windows.
Please don't forget that this is an alpha stage OS
on
ReactOS 0.3.1 Released
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
...and that when or if it should ever reach beta (or, god forbid, release) stage it will be sued back into oblivion by Microsoft for an almost infinate number software patent violations.
I mean, come on guys...you know it's going to happen, it's just a matter of time. Why not invest your time and money into something that isn't litigation-bait?
I just heard some sad news on cnn. Famed costume advernturer Captain America was found dead in his home at Timely Comics. Even if you are not a comic book fan you probably enjoyed his defeat of the nazis and his relentless persuit of freedom for all americans. Truly an American Icon. He will be missed.
Just because a bunch of people on a web board request something, doesn't mean that it's a reflection of what people who are actually going to pay cash money want. It reflects that there's a strong desire for dell to preload linux and OpenOffice.org; but it's not necessarily a given that the people who are making that request are willing to shell out the bucks to buy a dell (especially considering the fact that most people who buy linux computers buy servers, and any desktop user who is competent enough to use Linux isn't going to settle for a prefab box, they're going to build theirs themselves).
...and the Vista user sits down and says to the waitress "I'll order an Opteron...I want to take a Leap Ahead" Not to be out-done, the Linux user looks up and says "My name is gentoo, and it's gonna be a long day for me...I'm gonna want some Intel Inside!". The waitress scribbles this down and looks to the mac user who blandly says "Just an abacus for me, thanks".
As the waitress walks off to get their order The Vista and Linux users look puzzled at the mac guy who then calmly explains "if you guys aren't going to use a real computer, neither will I"
Let 'em have it. Last month I downloaded Solaris Express build 53, which includes a much newer GNOME (2.16, as opposed to 2.8 or whatever in Solaris 10) and firefox 2.
I wish I hadn't wasted the last of my mod points in another discussion. Take a virtual +5 from me...the definition of what they mean by 'tech' is seriously myopic any more. As you pointed out, it's not all just SOAP, AJAX and clusters. There's so much more.
Didn't read past your first sentence...it was tantamount to saying "Until we all win the lottery, we'll always" or "Until we all ${other ridiculous analogy}". There's no practical way to rein in the government or big business. It seriously, literally is not possible to do; not in any meaningful way at any rate.
>We always have to look at the tradeoff between the intrusion on our freedoms and the the results that the technology brings.
Why? Seriously..why? Can you answer that question why we 'have to'...and could you answer that question to your friends and neighbors who do not follow the news and the privacy issues surrounding the recent changes in the last few years?
Could you give an explanation to the people who take the color-coded terror alerts seriously?
Who are your neighbors...who is the voting majority...and can you come up with an argument that will sway them?
Those are the people who know the least and yet that we have the greatest need to inform because they are the majority of voters.
So, I'll ask you again....Why exactly do we 'have to'?
Hey, I'm sold! The government may at will monitor every call, every email, examine my credit history in minute detail, access my library lending habits and even do a physical search of my home (neither without telling me)...but if by doing so one child's life is saved then by gum -it's worth it!
>The problem is that we are allowing employers and other individuals to act as if we are doing something wrong by posting a comical video or a blog of out personal political thoughts.
That's only half of the problem; the other half of the problem is that people are unwilling to accept the fact that what they say will be used against them in the court of public (and private) opinion.
>Will the internet ultimately become a way to limit information and enforce conformity or force anonymity on anyone who wants to share their views. Yes, in exactly the same way that pop-culture and majority opinion has served to reinforce the dominant society and repressed dissenting views (eg liberals). It will perpetuate a social reinforcement feedback loop of people wanting to do only what is approved of by the most uptight member of society for fear of reprocussions.
This is already happening in Asia, eg the korean person who was harassed after having pictures posted online of her not picking up after her dog.
>I think not. Then you are wrong, and you need to reasses what is realistic.
>The current trend seems more likely to reshape society than it does to be shaped by society. This is what the punk rockers thought, as did the hippies before them; both groups were assimilated and their subcultural strenths and uniqueness blended in and used to the advantage of the dominant society. The exact same thing will happen with this.
> People will embrace more open expression and churches, parents, and employers are just going to have to get used to not judging people on their internet posts or being sued for doing so.
This is what the hippies said about the mores and repression of the 1950s; but the 90's made the 50's look like the 60's, and 9/11 and served to turn all of us into good little neo-cons.
This too will be assimliated and used to the advantage of the dominant culture; probably to cull out those who are unfit or unwilling to conform to the standards of the community.
>That's one of the most self-righteous, idiotic statements I've ever heard. NO U.
>You're saying that anybody who gets paid to do something does it for the money and doesn't care about the quality of what they do.
No, I'm saying that a lot of people would prefer that whoever is commiting to debian does so for the right reasons, and not because they're simply collecting a bounty.
>I get paid for most of what I do, but I take pride in my work. So you're working in a stable and fulfilling job as opposed to collecting bounties on random projects then, I assume?
>If you had, you'd know that sometimes people have to say, "God, I'd love to work on that, but I need to be doing something that brings in some money."...and being in the work force, you should know that often times people say "hey, I can cobble together some shit in five minutes and move on to the next thing I don't want to be doing".
>So what you're saying is that Debian is for fucked-up smelly hippies who just can't handle the idea that people need money to live?
No. He's saying that he'd prefer that the people contributing to Debian are motivated by the desire to solve problems, and to make a good product better; as opposed to having debian be contributed by programmers whose attitude is "whatever, fuck it, it's good enough; where's my ten bucks?".
And he's not alone in that sentiment...not alone at all.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, it's not like we're talking about a porn site or something. What's up with this?
It would be nice if it worked like that, but sadly it's not about sales, or even piracy; it's about media/medium control. Right now the p2p networks -for better or for worse- are acting as the only balancing factor to the mafiaa's monopoly (please don't trot out emusic and other fringe crap; it's not an alternative if it doesn't provide what the people want-and the people don't want shitty rap, shitty folk or shitty emo music).
If you eliminated pirating and the p2p networks, it's more likely that controls would increase as the mafiaa sought to solidify their monopoly and prevent any future economic disruptions.
They don't have to get a ruling. They can shut it down for the duration of the trail and make it effectively illegal to host or distribute in any country where the US has any economic influence. That's the US, Austrailia, India and Europe, and parts of Asia
Good luck hosting the project in timbuktu.
I ordered the media kit dvd on the 2nd and got it in the mail today.
No one has ever gone after MS's meat and potatoes before. Also, what do you think MS is preparing to do with all the patent noise over "linux IP violations"?
a) by the time ReactOS is usable, there will be. Also, american law is enforcable overseas; cf AllOfMp3 closure and The Pirate Bay raids.
b) you're assuming that they'll be acting alone; they have novell's help on the Linux front, and slapping a Cease-And-Desist on ReactOS would be trivial.
c)the only thing useable in an antitrust suit would be the undocumented apis...which have nothing to do with ReactOS. Anything done in ReactOS can easily be found and studied via MSDN.
mod my comments down all you like, but it's a fact that once ReactOS becomes any sort of threat (real or percieved) to Microsoft, Microsoft will break out the lawyers and the software patent lawsuits.
Hide your heads in the sand all you want to...it's your time you're wasting, not mine.
>If React OS can keep me running my current Windows apps in a sensible, secure, and supported environment, then I can avoid Vista. That means less headaches, and less expense.
Which is exactly why Microsoft will dig deep into it's legal fund and patent portfolio and nuke reactos off the face of the planet the very second that ReactOS becomes a practical alternative to Windows.
...and that when or if it should ever reach beta (or, god forbid, release) stage it will be sued back into oblivion by Microsoft for an almost infinate number software patent violations.
I mean, come on guys...you know it's going to happen, it's just a matter of time. Why not invest your time and money into something that isn't litigation-bait?
I just heard some sad news on cnn. Famed costume advernturer Captain America was found dead in his home at Timely Comics. Even if you are not a comic book fan you probably enjoyed his defeat of the nazis and his relentless persuit of freedom for all americans. Truly an American Icon. He will be missed.
Microsoft has the corporate desktop sewn up, plus they're still cheaper than apple. No way will they ever dethrone MS.
No...it's just that these things just take a hell of a long time to make.
(Aw jeez, now I'm going to have to make another one....)
Just because a bunch of people on a web board request something, doesn't mean that it's a reflection of what people who are actually going to pay cash money want. It reflects that there's a strong desire for dell to preload linux and OpenOffice.org; but it's not necessarily a given that the people who are making that request are willing to shell out the bucks to buy a dell (especially considering the fact that most people who buy linux computers buy servers, and any desktop user who is competent enough to use Linux isn't going to settle for a prefab box, they're going to build theirs themselves).
...and the Vista user sits down and says to the waitress "I'll order an Opteron...I want to take a Leap Ahead"
Not to be out-done, the Linux user looks up and says "My name is gentoo, and it's gonna be a long day for me...I'm gonna want some Intel Inside!".
The waitress scribbles this down and looks to the mac user who blandly says "Just an abacus for me, thanks".
As the waitress walks off to get their order The Vista and Linux users look puzzled at the mac guy who then calmly explains "if you guys aren't going to use a real computer, neither will I"
Let 'em have it. Last month I downloaded Solaris Express build 53, which includes a much newer GNOME (2.16, as opposed to 2.8 or whatever in Solaris 10) and firefox 2.
Now that they've bought (out) Novell? No, one else thinks they'll dick around with SCO.
Only to have the threat of Novell/MS looming over us.
Personally, I'd rather have to worry about SCO; they were never a serious threat.
I wish I hadn't wasted the last of my mod points in another discussion. Take a virtual +5 from me...the definition of what they mean by 'tech' is seriously myopic any more. As you pointed out, it's not all just SOAP, AJAX and clusters. There's so much more.
....only to people who run windows or MacOS. KDE 4: "giving you less reasons to use Unix"
Didn't anyone learn from OS/2's mistake? Don't make your OS irrelevant!
How do you propose to "rein in" big business?
Yeah...that's what I thought.
Didn't read past your first sentence...it was tantamount to saying "Until we all win the lottery, we'll always" or "Until we all ${other ridiculous analogy}". There's no practical way to rein in the government or big business. It seriously, literally is not possible to do; not in any meaningful way at any rate.
>We always have to look at the tradeoff between the intrusion on our freedoms and the the results that the technology brings.
..why? Can you answer that question why we 'have to'...and could you answer that question to your friends and neighbors who do not follow the news and the privacy issues surrounding the recent changes in the last few years?
Why? Seriously
Could you give an explanation to the people who take the color-coded terror alerts seriously?
Who are your neighbors...who is the voting majority...and can you come up with an argument that will sway them?
Those are the people who know the least and yet that we have the greatest need to inform because they are the majority of voters.
So, I'll ask you again....Why exactly do we 'have to'?
Hey, I'm sold! The government may at will monitor every call, every email, examine my credit history in minute detail, access my library lending habits and even do a physical search of my home (neither without telling me)...but if by doing so one child's life is saved then by gum -it's worth it!
>The problem is that we are allowing employers and other individuals to act as if we are doing something wrong by posting a comical video or a blog of out personal political thoughts.
That's only half of the problem; the other half of the problem is that people are unwilling to accept the fact that what they say will be used against them in the court of public (and private) opinion.
>Will the internet ultimately become a way to limit information and enforce conformity or force anonymity on anyone who wants to share their views.
Yes, in exactly the same way that pop-culture and majority opinion has served to reinforce the dominant society and repressed dissenting views (eg liberals). It will perpetuate a social reinforcement feedback loop of people wanting to do only what is approved of by the most uptight member of society for fear of reprocussions.
This is already happening in Asia, eg the korean person who was harassed after having pictures posted online of her not picking up after her dog.
>I think not.
Then you are wrong, and you need to reasses what is realistic.
>The current trend seems more likely to reshape society than it does to be shaped by society.
This is what the punk rockers thought, as did the hippies before them; both groups were assimilated and their subcultural strenths and uniqueness blended in and used to the advantage of the dominant society. The exact same thing will happen with this.
> People will embrace more open expression and churches, parents, and employers are just going to have to get used to not judging people on their internet posts or being sued for doing so.
This is what the hippies said about the mores and repression of the 1950s; but the 90's made the 50's look like the 60's, and 9/11 and served to turn all of us into good little neo-cons.
This too will be assimliated and used to the advantage of the dominant culture; probably to cull out those who are unfit or unwilling to conform to the standards of the community.
>That's one of the most self-righteous, idiotic statements I've ever heard.
...and being in the work force, you should know that often times people say "hey, I can cobble together some shit in five minutes and move on to the next thing I don't want to be doing".
NO U.
>You're saying that anybody who gets paid to do something does it for the money and doesn't care about the quality of what they do.
No, I'm saying that a lot of people would prefer that whoever is commiting to debian does so for the right reasons, and not because they're simply collecting a bounty.
>I get paid for most of what I do, but I take pride in my work.
So you're working in a stable and fulfilling job as opposed to collecting bounties on random projects then, I assume?
>If you had, you'd know that sometimes people have to say, "God, I'd love to work on that, but I need to be doing something that brings in some money."
>So what you're saying is that Debian is for fucked-up smelly hippies who just can't handle the idea that people need money to live?
No. He's saying that he'd prefer that the people contributing to Debian are motivated by the desire to solve problems, and to make a good product better; as opposed to having debian be contributed by programmers whose attitude is "whatever, fuck it, it's good enough; where's my ten bucks?".
And he's not alone in that sentiment...not alone at all.