> I'm having a hard time pinning down what's
> REALLY wrong with the SSSCA, in a manner that
> non-Linux users can understand.
Say "Non-Technically oriented," that way you won't be misunderstood.
> Undoubtably, the restrictions that
> these access controls impose will not be open
> for debate by the American public. The
> corporations will have total control.
Say eactly which corporations will have control, and over what. Don't leave it to the imagination
of a Senator, he's not paid to have one.
> The problem with the SSSCA is that it
> effectively makes Linux and all other Open
> Source software (software for which the
> source code is available for free) illegal.
Why do you believe this? Making a US only patch set to address the SSSCA shold be possible. Stupid, but possible.
What about the economic consequences of Sen. Holling's folly? Anything that could possibly be conceived of as being a "digital device" (do fingers or anything manipulated by fingers count?), will require, under the SSSCA, security controls. Point out the economic hardships involved with designing new hardware & software to accomodate this. Also point out that most hardware manufacturers problably won't be too happy about being forced to do this (they contribute vast sums also). Illustrate the impossibility of enforcing this propsed law, I for one will be hanging onto my non-SSSCA compliant hardware for a long, long time; and I'll go out of my way to hamstring this particular law whenever possible. I doubt that I'll be alone in this pursuit.
Also, point out the fact that the voters will have to buy SSSCA compliant hardware, and pay extra for the privilege. There's the meat of your arguement. Although I believe you're correct that
the SSSCA and the DMCA are unconstitutional, I wouldn't dewll on this in your letter. I'd point
out the economic implications, those will be the
things that get his attention the most.
That's what I meant when I wrote "Show me the Money."
As for the rest, I got irritated by the "Non-Linux" user phrase, and it's apparently unintended implications, for which I apologize.
> I'm having a hard time pinning down what's
> REALLY wrong with the SSSCA, in a manner that
> non-Linux users can understand."
Extract your head from your ass, first of all.
Realize that as a linux user, you have no unique
perspective, nor an amazing gift of intellect bestowed by your operating system of choice.
You're just one of the tiresome "Me Too's" on usenet. Someone said "Hey, get linux! It's cool", and there you were, myriad floppies in hand (more likely in this case, only one pathetically small floppy). Sadly, you've shown yourself to be below average because you can't think of a Really Cool (tm) thing to say about the SSSCA.
I'm a "non-Linux" user (nor do I use Microsoft), and shockingly enough; I'm quite capable of seeing many of the dangers of the SSSCA for myself. Without the aid of a "Linux User" to tell me how to think.
Here's a thought you might be able to use in your little article, "Show me the Money." That's what it's all about. Yet another Congressman sells out. If it weren't for the dangers, it'd be pretty dull and routine.
Give me a PC that will support Solaris x86.
One that runs flawlessly, and continuously.
Make damned sure that the hardware in the box is
supported by the O/S. Oh, yes, I'll pay more for this, I know. If you can do it, it's worth my money & time.
I make my living on Solaris (both x86 and Sparc), and have no interest in linux or *BSD.
So provide a rock solid Solaris x86 system and support it!
We'll be glad you did!
Re:"Why I'm glad the Shuttle Blew Up"
on
The Challenger
·
· Score: 1
You, loosenut, should do a little more research.
And also realize that engineers (I'm proud to be one, although in an unrelated field), don't usually have the luxury of choosing the projects
that they work on. Ideally, assuming that you're
a cluefull individual (doubtful, in this case),
you'd bother and try and find out a few facts.
Engineers responsible DID try and warn the management (INSERT BLAME HERE), that cold temps
WOULD cause problems. Management pushed the issue,
the engineers said it was bad idea.
Managers killed good people and a lot of dreams that day, that's the real tragedy.
Next, would I trust Jello Biafra with my wallet?
NO! Thank God his 15 minutes of fame is almost over.
It's most likely some gov't hack who needs to say *something* to insure his cushy job is safe. Nothing more. Remember when the US Navy had to reboot damn near an entire *WARSHIP* because it
had the bad taste to depend on M$?
Now that's funny! And appropriate. Who gives a shit about teen angst? I personally gave up on it 20 years ago. It's been beaten to death.
Ask some real questions, like, why should I use MentalUnix over Red Hat, Debian or any of the others? And why aren't you using a something else like OpenBSD or egads, Solaris for example?
Slashdot Mirror
Probably something to do with Novell's home state being Utah.
I hope you will learn that we still have to report to management. Nuff said.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these government officials!
Easy, it's called "Congress"
Ever hear of Solaris? Immune, period.
> I'm having a hard time pinning down what's
> REALLY wrong with the SSSCA, in a manner that
> non-Linux users can understand.
Say "Non-Technically oriented," that way you won't be misunderstood.
> Undoubtably, the restrictions that
> these access controls impose will not be open
> for debate by the American public. The
> corporations will have total control.
Say eactly which corporations will have control, and over what. Don't leave it to the imagination
of a Senator, he's not paid to have one.
> The problem with the SSSCA is that it
> effectively makes Linux and all other Open
> Source software (software for which the
> source code is available for free) illegal.
Why do you believe this? Making a US only patch set to address the SSSCA shold be possible. Stupid, but possible.
What about the economic consequences of Sen. Holling's folly? Anything that could possibly be conceived of as being a "digital device" (do fingers or anything manipulated by fingers count?), will require, under the SSSCA, security controls. Point out the economic hardships involved with designing new hardware & software to accomodate this. Also point out that most hardware manufacturers problably won't be too happy about being forced to do this (they contribute vast sums also). Illustrate the impossibility of enforcing this propsed law, I for one will be hanging onto my non-SSSCA compliant hardware for a long, long time; and I'll go out of my way to hamstring this particular law whenever possible. I doubt that I'll be alone in this pursuit.
Also, point out the fact that the voters will have to buy SSSCA compliant hardware, and pay extra for the privilege. There's the meat of your arguement. Although I believe you're correct that
the SSSCA and the DMCA are unconstitutional, I wouldn't dewll on this in your letter. I'd point
out the economic implications, those will be the
things that get his attention the most.
That's what I meant when I wrote "Show me the Money."
As for the rest, I got irritated by the "Non-Linux" user phrase, and it's apparently unintended implications, for which I apologize.
> I'm having a hard time pinning down what's
> REALLY wrong with the SSSCA, in a manner that
> non-Linux users can understand."
Extract your head from your ass, first of all.
Realize that as a linux user, you have no unique
perspective, nor an amazing gift of intellect bestowed by your operating system of choice.
You're just one of the tiresome "Me Too's" on usenet. Someone said "Hey, get linux! It's cool", and there you were, myriad floppies in hand (more likely in this case, only one pathetically small floppy). Sadly, you've shown yourself to be below average because you can't think of a Really Cool (tm) thing to say about the SSSCA.
I'm a "non-Linux" user (nor do I use Microsoft), and shockingly enough; I'm quite capable of seeing many of the dangers of the SSSCA for myself. Without the aid of a "Linux User" to tell me how to think.
Here's a thought you might be able to use in your little article, "Show me the Money." That's what it's all about. Yet another Congressman sells out. If it weren't for the dangers, it'd be pretty dull and routine.
-- And me without a penguin! ---
At 5 MPH. Let's see Ford, GM or anyone else do that!
Give me a PC that will support Solaris x86. One that runs flawlessly, and continuously. Make damned sure that the hardware in the box is supported by the O/S. Oh, yes, I'll pay more for this, I know. If you can do it, it's worth my money & time. I make my living on Solaris (both x86 and Sparc), and have no interest in linux or *BSD. So provide a rock solid Solaris x86 system and support it! We'll be glad you did!
You, loosenut, should do a little more research. And also realize that engineers (I'm proud to be one, although in an unrelated field), don't usually have the luxury of choosing the projects that they work on. Ideally, assuming that you're a cluefull individual (doubtful, in this case), you'd bother and try and find out a few facts. Engineers responsible DID try and warn the management (INSERT BLAME HERE), that cold temps WOULD cause problems. Management pushed the issue, the engineers said it was bad idea. Managers killed good people and a lot of dreams that day, that's the real tragedy. Next, would I trust Jello Biafra with my wallet? NO! Thank God his 15 minutes of fame is almost over.
It's most likely some gov't hack who needs to say *something* to insure his cushy job is safe. Nothing more. Remember when the US Navy had to reboot damn near an entire *WARSHIP* because it
had the bad taste to depend on M$?
Now that's funny! And appropriate. Who gives a shit about teen angst? I personally gave up on it 20 years ago. It's been beaten to death.
Ask some real questions, like, why should I use MentalUnix over Red Hat, Debian or any of the others? And why aren't you using a something else like OpenBSD or egads, Solaris for example?
You'll pry my Sun type 5 from my cold dead hands (besides, it kinda goes with the Ultra).