They destroy families, lives, health, and general peace and good order. Making them legal does not prevent any of that.
I applaud felony convictions for drug possession and usage and the barriers they introduce to such individuals getting gainful employment after release.
Wanting to be equal does not mean you are equal. I'm pretty sure that there are Debian devs who are 10x as productive as the other devs and if the lesser devs have self esteem issues with that well too goddamn bad. They can go and get bent.
Lets take the Linux kernel for example. If you were to start paying those devs I would pick out say maybe the top 15, Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox...etc and pay them handsomely and the rest get bupkis. Writing a driver here or there really isn't worth compensation in my book.
Besides, if anyone bitches you can just throw open source back in their face and say "This IS the way you wanted it isn't it? I mean you COULD have gone to work for a proprietary software company but you CHOSE to code for free instead. So what exactly is your problem with this, genius?"
you could just grow up and stop believing in ponies. Not being able to run large companies would destroy our economy. Its far more worth it to our society as a whole to allow a few executives to go overboard with their power than it is to totally wreck our national economy and throw millions out of work. The rest of the world isn't going to put a number of workers cap on their companies and they'll eat our lunch.
So no, you should not have to personally know each and every person who works for you. Thats just retarded.
"Case examples (which I've encountered on a monthly-to-weekly basis since around the time I hit that puberty thing: Men muttering (or bellowing) ZOMG WILL YOU LOOK AT THAT ASS?! or otherwise spluttering when some moderately pleasant whatever walks past. I'm a guy, and I find that shit disgusting. Stop it."
No. I won't stop it. Now do you mind telling me why you find it so disgusting? I don't bellow by the way, that would be rude but when they're out of ear shot who the hell does it harm?
How about Radical Realist or GoodForSomething Goose?
I'm guessing you missed the news that Ubuntu is coming out with a COMPLETELY free distro for those who like practically useless installs? They haven't named it yet but they are definitely coming out with it. What do you think of the name, CrippledByPrinciplesBuntu?
What part of comedy and parody do you not understand? You don't have to be accurate when you are making fun of people, in fact being INACCURATE is the entire point. Thus libel and defamation do not apply here.
Linus wasn't bribed. You don't have to be bribed to not agree 100% with RMS. He just thought the GPLv3 went too far in restricting people's use of the code.
I KNOW China's problems aren't economic. But economic advancement CAN bring about political change. Your plan of imposing a 50% tariff on Chinese goods WOULD work if it was something the American people would tolerate. A tariff that high would raise prices for many many products that Americans buy by a great deal. The easy thing about grand standing is you don't have to make sure that your ideas are practical. You just get on a soapbox/high horse and dictate from on high to those you consider "evil and or ignorant". China isn't the Soviet Union. Our strategy doesn't need to be the same. The situation isn't the same. China isn't enveloping its neighbors under an "iron curtain." Politics isn't binary code, its not black and white. Its not like the GPL where you can dictate your terms. You've got to negotiate and compromise. Or fail.
So seeing as the American populace isn't going to tolerate a 50% price increase of products sold at Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot, JC Penney....etc that leaves us with economic engagement. Its already produced results. As China urbanizes they are looseing authortarian control very slowly but surely. Sexual freedom has increased as has education on condom usage and the like, the media is exploding in China. Websites, TV shows...etc. No its not like the United States yet but it was never going to be that way over night.
Ripping off? The GPLv2 allows whatever Google is doing to be done! They're not disobeying any part of the license. If they were they could be sued. Simple as that. So now you want to attach imaginary wishful violations to the way they do business? Thats not based in reality pal. Also correct me if I'm wrong but haven't most of the most objectional parts of the GPLv3 been toned down as Linus Torvalds now agrees with the GPLv3? In any case Google can continue to use GPLv2 versions of Linux for its servers or even fork Linux for itself along the GPLv2 codebase and then release their own version of Linux to the world. A company with their resources could certianly do it it and I could see a bunch of people switching to Google Linux, especially if they make it even easier to use than Ubuntu is. If worse comes to worse Google could switch to FreeBSD which is what Yahoo uses.
And Google is going to keep their public/consumer services free for the simple fact that the money they make selling the information they collect on you is a lot more than they could make if they outright charged you for their services. Charging lowers the amount of people using their services which would kill their advertising business. It would be suicide. In order to rake in the billions that they're currently making they need all the users they can get and the best way to get the highest number of users is to keep their consumer services FREE!
* Whats a Burner?
As for Google dealing with despicable regimes, well so do a lot of other companies. If I didn't do business with any companies that had transactions with "questionable" people then I wouldn't be able to buy anything from anyone, ever. An argument can be made that increasing economic activity in nations like China and helping them to liberalize their markets and increase the ranks of the middle class who live there will in its own due time bring about political change once everyone there gets used to a higher standard of living instead of the mostly agrarian standard they have today or have had in the past. Stop companies from doing business there and you possibly put a stop to that progress.
I respect what you are saying. But consider this if you will.......what you consider to be "agendas" is just a genuine desire to rid the IT land of the scourge of Microsoft. They're a destroyer of technology. Seeing as how a lot of OSS folks LOVE technology this is a sensible position to take. I find it hard to believe that Google at its worst could match Microsoft on its most benevolent day. It would require a major reworking of Google's DNA. Microsoft from the get-go has been all about locking up technology and making sure its not open. Anyone remember Bill Gate's letter to free software developers over 25 years ago?
I'm sure the agenda puts off many more than just you, but thats because most folks are 'don't rock the boat' types. Thats ok, I get it. The problem is that there really isn't a future for technology while Microsoft remains dominant. Its so disheartening for those who love technology to have to go to work and deal with Microsoft Windows and Microsoft SQL Server or Microsoft Internet Information Server or Microsoft Exchange.......etc. For those who don't really care about superior quality again its not a big deal for them. But there was a time when IT was about more than just "getting the job done". This is the disgust and anger that feeds the anti-Microsoft sentiment.
Google has engendered nothing like this. For the love of God YES YES YES I would love for Google and Microsoft to trade places in the marketplace. All I ask is that you MIGHTILY resist the urge that all humans have to be suspicious of anything that grows big, such as Google has. Yes they're a corporation. Yes they're in it for the money. But they manage to do it by embracing technology and providing it to a wider base of users for FREE. They can data mine every second of my life if thats all they ask in return.
It can get wearying at times the constant battle against the socialists on this site but here I go once more unto the breach....
There's a difference between stabilizing an area and just outright transferring wealth to an area. If I have slandered you by calling you a Socialist then I most humbly apologize and offer to reimburse damages to your Slashdot persona by paying you 500 digital simoleans, but if I am correct then at least let me hope that you have everyone's best interests at heart.
You are correct that nations with huge amounts of economic inequality that there is less stability. The way you worded your solution however makes me cautious and suspicious. Its definitely a problem that needs to be worked on. The gap between rich and poor does need to be kept as small as possible. But how do we get there? Outright transfers of wealth from the wealthy to the poor? Or rather should we provide more education and opportunities for the poor to enrich themselves and build their own wealth? If you word it one way it sounds like SOCIALISM which well in my book = BAD, but if you word it another way it sounds like a slow evolution towards a freemarket economy and away from centrally planned socialist economies which = GOOD.
If you'd like to know which method is more likely to prevail and achieve success then take a look at this talk given at the TED Conference about the "Debunking Myths About the Third World" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUwS1uAdUcI
I'm sorry. What part of the following areas are in the United States? "how blind are you? ever hear of bali? madrid subway bombing? 7/7 in britain? how about what goes on in iraq on a daily basis? who is perpetrating these things?"
From the way I recall things, Sept 11th happened in the US, and all the things you just stated happened outside of the US. If I have it wrong please correct me. In the 6 years since 9/11 not another event in the US has taken place.
"you must get involved, or problems like darfur spreads. look at the geopolitical environment around darfur. you ask me what the men who are perpetrating the crimes would do next were they to consolidate a base there and take their agenda to the next level. do you think people with ill will and global amibtions don't exist?"
As for this, we're talking about Africa here. The continent's combined military might (were it ever to competently combine) is not enough to threaten ANY OTHER CONTINENT militarily. Not Austraila, not Europe, not Asia, not South America, not even Central America and certainly not North America. They can't even threaten Antarctica because Africa doesn't have enough coats to survive the invasion.
I would like to know whats your plan for bringing the crisis in Darfur. You said in another post that military options aren't the only way so I'd like to know whats your non-military plan for stopping the warlords in Darfur. Enlighten us.
You are actually wrong. Poverty and suffering does not spread because some parts of the world have their heads screwed on right and others don't. September 11th was a ONE OFF event. It hasn't happened again in 6 years and its not like that attack was so sophisticated to begin with.
The problem in Darfur really IS Darfur's problem. The violence there isn't going to spread here and even if it were going to then all we would have to do is stop/kill the perpetrators, not help rebuild the country.
If you want to live a decent life then its up to you to make that happen, same as for everyone else. I don't know why certain folks like you keep insisting that we solve every crisis on planet Earth. When we try to do that we get labelled "imperialist." So who's right? The folks who want us to stay out of their business or the folks who want us to get into other people's business? What gives you the position of moral superiority here?
Also, here's some advice. When you tell people that they're letting others die via genocide when they play video games you aren't making any friends or achieving progress. You just piss people off and lead people to conclude that folks with your position are just stark raving mad lunatics.
By the way, what are you doing to stop gang violence in US cities? What about rural poverty in the US? What are you doing to to combat homelessness in the US? Or does Darfur only rate on your radar because George Clooney and Noah Wylie deem it important to them?
Its a good thing we aren't actually talking about ice cream then because then what you describe would be truly ridiculous. But since we're talking about weapons of mass destruction that could kill millions I think the level of action the US is taking is wholly appropriate.
Slashdot Mirror
They destroy families, lives, health, and general peace and good order. Making them legal does not prevent any of that.
I applaud felony convictions for drug possession and usage and the barriers they introduce to such individuals getting gainful employment after release.
Enable much?
I'll save my boycotts for issues that involve life or death situations/consequences.
Wanting to be equal does not mean you are equal. I'm pretty sure that there are Debian devs who are 10x as productive as the other devs and if the lesser devs have self esteem issues with that well too goddamn bad. They can go and get bent.
Lets take the Linux kernel for example. If you were to start paying those devs I would pick out say maybe the top 15, Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox...etc and pay them handsomely and the rest get bupkis. Writing a driver here or there really isn't worth compensation in my book.
Besides, if anyone bitches you can just throw open source back in their face and say "This IS the way you wanted it isn't it? I mean you COULD have gone to work for a proprietary software company but you CHOSE to code for free instead. So what exactly is your problem with this, genius?"
They've been here all along.
You see, humans include those folks who think or act in ways you do not agree with.
Yeah it says the corporate managers have some sense, and the guys who give away their work for free do not.
Go ahead and mod me down because yes I have in fact just called the overwhelming majority of unemployed open source developers idiots.
Its ridiculous to call Democrats anything but on the left when they're trying to advance gay rights and keep abortion legal.
Would you like to try again?
Joel is wrong about one thing MBA's absolutely CAN run businesses they don't understand. Otherwise Lou Gerstner would have failed at IBM.
Never heard of service plans have you?
you could just grow up and stop believing in ponies. Not being able to run large companies would destroy our economy. Its far more worth it to our society as a whole to allow a few executives to go overboard with their power than it is to totally wreck our national economy and throw millions out of work. The rest of the world isn't going to put a number of workers cap on their companies and they'll eat our lunch.
So no, you should not have to personally know each and every person who works for you. Thats just retarded.
"Case examples (which I've encountered on a monthly-to-weekly basis since around the time I hit that puberty thing: Men muttering (or bellowing) ZOMG WILL YOU LOOK AT THAT ASS?! or otherwise spluttering when some moderately pleasant whatever walks past. I'm a guy, and I find that shit disgusting. Stop it."
No. I won't stop it. Now do you mind telling me why you find it so disgusting? I don't bellow by the way, that would be rude but when they're out of ear shot who the hell does it harm?
By the way, how is the above any different from you having pictures like this on your website?
http://amongthechosen.com/candy/cat_candy.php
Hypocrite much?
How about Radical Realist or GoodForSomething Goose?
I'm guessing you missed the news that Ubuntu is coming out with a COMPLETELY free distro for those who like practically useless installs? They haven't named it yet but they are definitely coming out with it. What do you think of the name, CrippledByPrinciplesBuntu?
Thats a bit paranoid don't you think?
How ready? Probably 5 minutes after Linux users stop acting like you...er I mean like asshats....er I mean ....so "hard to manage."
So as Mr. Shuttleworth inferred "Not yet."
What part of comedy and parody do you not understand? You don't have to be accurate when you are making fun of people, in fact being INACCURATE is the entire point. Thus libel and defamation do not apply here.
Linus wasn't bribed. You don't have to be bribed to not agree 100% with RMS. He just thought the GPLv3 went too far in restricting people's use of the code.
I KNOW China's problems aren't economic. But economic advancement CAN bring about political change. Your plan of imposing a 50% tariff on Chinese goods WOULD work if it was something the American people would tolerate. A tariff that high would raise prices for many many products that Americans buy by a great deal. The easy thing about grand standing is you don't have to make sure that your ideas are practical. You just get on a soapbox/high horse and dictate from on high to those you consider "evil and or ignorant". China isn't the Soviet Union. Our strategy doesn't need to be the same. The situation isn't the same. China isn't enveloping its neighbors under an "iron curtain." Politics isn't binary code, its not black and white. Its not like the GPL where you can dictate your terms. You've got to negotiate and compromise. Or fail.
So seeing as the American populace isn't going to tolerate a 50% price increase of products sold at Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot, JC Penney....etc that leaves us with economic engagement. Its already produced results. As China urbanizes they are looseing authortarian control very slowly but surely. Sexual freedom has increased as has education on condom usage and the like, the media is exploding in China. Websites, TV shows...etc. No its not like the United States yet but it was never going to be that way over night.
Ripping off? The GPLv2 allows whatever Google is doing to be done! They're not disobeying any part of the license. If they were they could be sued. Simple as that. So now you want to attach imaginary wishful violations to the way they do business? Thats not based in reality pal. Also correct me if I'm wrong but haven't most of the most objectional parts of the GPLv3 been toned down as Linus Torvalds now agrees with the GPLv3? In any case Google can continue to use GPLv2 versions of Linux for its servers or even fork Linux for itself along the GPLv2 codebase and then release their own version of Linux to the world. A company with their resources could certianly do it it and I could see a bunch of people switching to Google Linux, especially if they make it even easier to use than Ubuntu is. If worse comes to worse Google could switch to FreeBSD which is what Yahoo uses.
And Google is going to keep their public/consumer services free for the simple fact that the money they make selling the information they collect on you is a lot more than they could make if they outright charged you for their services. Charging lowers the amount of people using their services which would kill their advertising business. It would be suicide. In order to rake in the billions that they're currently making they need all the users they can get and the best way to get the highest number of users is to keep their consumer services FREE!
* Whats a Burner?
As for Google dealing with despicable regimes, well so do a lot of other companies. If I didn't do business with any companies that had transactions with "questionable" people then I wouldn't be able to buy anything from anyone, ever. An argument can be made that increasing economic activity in nations like China and helping them to liberalize their markets and increase the ranks of the middle class who live there will in its own due time bring about political change once everyone there gets used to a higher standard of living instead of the mostly agrarian standard they have today or have had in the past. Stop companies from doing business there and you possibly put a stop to that progress.
I respect what you are saying. But consider this if you will.... ...what you consider to be "agendas" is just a genuine desire to rid the IT land of the scourge of Microsoft. They're a destroyer of technology. Seeing as how a lot of OSS folks LOVE technology this is a sensible position to take. I find it hard to believe that Google at its worst could match Microsoft on its most benevolent day. It would require a major reworking of Google's DNA. Microsoft from the get-go has been all about locking up technology and making sure its not open. Anyone remember Bill Gate's letter to free software developers over 25 years ago?
I'm sure the agenda puts off many more than just you, but thats because most folks are 'don't rock the boat' types. Thats ok, I get it. The problem is that there really isn't a future for technology while Microsoft remains dominant. Its so disheartening for those who love technology to have to go to work and deal with Microsoft Windows and Microsoft SQL Server or Microsoft Internet Information Server or Microsoft Exchange.......etc. For those who don't really care about superior quality again its not a big deal for them. But there was a time when IT was about more than just "getting the job done". This is the disgust and anger that feeds the anti-Microsoft sentiment.
Google has engendered nothing like this. For the love of God YES YES YES I would love for Google and Microsoft to trade places in the marketplace. All I ask is that you MIGHTILY resist the urge that all humans have to be suspicious of anything that grows big, such as Google has. Yes they're a corporation. Yes they're in it for the money. But they manage to do it by embracing technology and providing it to a wider base of users for FREE. They can data mine every second of my life if thats all they ask in return.
It can get wearying at times the constant battle against the socialists on this site but here I go once more unto the breach....
There's a difference between stabilizing an area and just outright transferring wealth to an area. If I have slandered you by calling you a Socialist then I most humbly apologize and offer to reimburse damages to your Slashdot persona by paying you 500 digital simoleans, but if I am correct then at least let me hope that you have everyone's best interests at heart.
You are correct that nations with huge amounts of economic inequality that there is less stability. The way you worded your solution however makes me cautious and suspicious. Its definitely a problem that needs to be worked on. The gap between rich and poor does need to be kept as small as possible. But how do we get there? Outright transfers of wealth from the wealthy to the poor? Or rather should we provide more education and opportunities for the poor to enrich themselves and build their own wealth? If you word it one way it sounds like SOCIALISM which well in my book = BAD, but if you word it another way it sounds like a slow evolution towards a freemarket economy and away from centrally planned socialist economies which = GOOD.
If you'd like to know which method is more likely to prevail and achieve success then take a look at this talk given at the TED Conference about the "Debunking Myths About the Third World" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUwS1uAdUcI
I'm sorry. What part of the following areas are in the United States? "how blind are you? ever hear of bali? madrid subway bombing? 7/7 in britain? how about what goes on in iraq on a daily basis? who is perpetrating these things?"
From the way I recall things, Sept 11th happened in the US, and all the things you just stated happened outside of the US. If I have it wrong please correct me. In the 6 years since 9/11 not another event in the US has taken place.
"you must get involved, or problems like darfur spreads. look at the geopolitical environment around darfur. you ask me what the men who are perpetrating the crimes would do next were they to consolidate a base there and take their agenda to the next level. do you think people with ill will and global amibtions don't exist?"
As for this, we're talking about Africa here. The continent's combined military might (were it ever to competently combine) is not enough to threaten ANY OTHER CONTINENT militarily. Not Austraila, not Europe, not Asia, not South America, not even Central America and certainly not North America. They can't even threaten Antarctica because Africa doesn't have enough coats to survive the invasion.
I would like to know whats your plan for bringing the crisis in Darfur. You said in another post that military options aren't the only way so I'd like to know whats your non-military plan for stopping the warlords in Darfur. Enlighten us.
You are actually wrong. Poverty and suffering does not spread because some parts of the world have their heads screwed on right and others don't. September 11th was a ONE OFF event. It hasn't happened again in 6 years and its not like that attack was so sophisticated to begin with.
The problem in Darfur really IS Darfur's problem. The violence there isn't going to spread here and even if it were going to then all we would have to do is stop/kill the perpetrators, not help rebuild the country.
If you want to live a decent life then its up to you to make that happen, same as for everyone else. I don't know why certain folks like you keep insisting that we solve every crisis on planet Earth. When we try to do that we get labelled "imperialist." So who's right? The folks who want us to stay out of their business or the folks who want us to get into other people's business? What gives you the position of moral superiority here?
Also, here's some advice. When you tell people that they're letting others die via genocide when they play video games you aren't making any friends or achieving progress. You just piss people off and lead people to conclude that folks with your position are just stark raving mad lunatics.
By the way, what are you doing to stop gang violence in US cities? What about rural poverty in the US? What are you doing to to combat homelessness in the US? Or does Darfur only rate on your radar because George Clooney and Noah Wylie deem it important to them?
Its a good thing we aren't actually talking about ice cream then because then what you describe would be truly ridiculous. But since we're talking about weapons of mass destruction that could kill millions I think the level of action the US is taking is wholly appropriate.
You are living in a dream land if you think there won't be an oil around in 2035.
So if you like Sin City and Doom you don't have class? Where did you come up with that crazy notion?
And that would not make hitting on your daughter's college friends creepy how exactly....?