It is pretty ironic that this story appeared right after the release of civ 3, the sequal to IMO the most addictive(and best) game ever. And I have my own personal story to add on this one.
The day after civ 3 came out, I had it and was playing it on my machine. All the excitement about the release had built up, as I have been waiting for it for a few years. Also notice that this is getting close to the end of the semester for us college folk. The combination of final projects and tests is quite the strain, and what to better get one's mind off school but a few hours of civ 3. Well, that's how it started, but I wanted to play the game so damn bad I actually skipped a few classes to have time in my day for it. Finally, I knew it couldn't go on and stayed up till 6:00 AM finishing my game, just so I could get some actual work done. What lesson should be learned by this? Well, maybe game companies could wait a few weeks till finals are over, and then I'd have all winter break to "get my fix."
Your points are valid, but really do not follow from my statements. A government(as well as a large company) should operate with open standards. For example, a government web site should comply with the well accepted standards of HTML. It should not require a certain browser or such to access it. However, if that web site runs on NT, BSD, or Linux it won't affect the site's availibility to the people.(except when NT keeps crashing of course)
The main point is that the government should not be different than other organizations in the fact that the best products should be used. I'm not in the Argentinan government, and I do not what specific software needs need to be addressed. If some application, for instance voice recognition software, is needed, it would be counterproductive to make it illegal to run a windows machine. Government should be more open, not less.
Again, on a professional level I'd run the open software, but I'd prefer to have that choice than have some high up political figure tell me to. Politics and rationality just don't mix.
When I first saw the title I thought that the law may have covered all software used in a country, not just for the government. Luckily, it was just the government changing, leaving the consumer the right to choose. Although I fully support Linux and the free software movement, I disagree with this law for one major reason: the best product cannot always be used. If a commercial product does the job better, it will end up costing more to use the "free" software. In the end I believe that free software will be used by a majority of people, but not because of some law, but because free software will be a better product. Capitalism will sort out the winners from the losers.
I agree that judging a person's worth by their mere appearance is in fact wrong. However, as human beings we have a strong sexual attraction to the opposite sex, and appearance does in fact have a vital role in this sexual attraction. Although I'm not Brad Pitt(not even near), I realize this fact. To deny that one enjoys looking at pretty women is to go against one's nature, a self distructive and non-natural activity.
If you must know, yes I am athiest, but as hard as you may find it to believe I also have morals.
Slashdot Mirror
It is pretty ironic that this story appeared right after the release of civ 3, the sequal to IMO the most addictive(and best) game ever. And I have my own personal story to add on this one.
The day after civ 3 came out, I had it and was playing it on my machine. All the excitement about the release had built up, as I have been waiting for it for a few years. Also notice that this is getting close to the end of the semester for us college folk. The combination of final projects and tests is quite the strain, and what to better get one's mind off school but a few hours of civ 3. Well, that's how it started, but I wanted to play the game so damn bad I actually skipped a few classes to have time in my day for it. Finally, I knew it couldn't go on and stayed up till 6:00 AM finishing my game, just so I could get some actual work done. What lesson should be learned by this? Well, maybe game companies could wait a few weeks till finals are over, and then I'd have all winter break to "get my fix."
Your points are valid, but really do not follow from my statements. A government(as well as a large company) should operate with open standards. For example, a government web site should comply with the well accepted standards of HTML. It should not require a certain browser or such to access it. However, if that web site runs on NT, BSD, or Linux it won't affect the site's availibility to the people.(except when NT keeps crashing of course)
The main point is that the government should not be different than other organizations in the fact that the best products should be used. I'm not in the Argentinan government, and I do not what specific software needs need to be addressed. If some application, for instance voice recognition software, is needed, it would be counterproductive to make it illegal to run a windows machine. Government should be more open, not less.
Again, on a professional level I'd run the open software, but I'd prefer to have that choice than have some high up political figure tell me to. Politics and rationality just don't mix.
When I first saw the title I thought that the law may have covered all software used in a country, not just for the government. Luckily, it was just the government changing, leaving the consumer the right to choose. Although I fully support Linux and the free software movement, I disagree with this law for one major reason: the best product cannot always be used. If a commercial product does the job better, it will end up costing more to use the "free" software. In the end I believe that free software will be used by a majority of people, but not because of some law, but because free software will be a better product. Capitalism will sort out the winners from the losers.
I agree that judging a person's worth by their mere appearance is in fact wrong. However, as human beings we have a strong sexual attraction to the opposite sex, and appearance does in fact have a vital role in this sexual attraction. Although I'm not Brad Pitt(not even near), I realize this fact. To deny that one enjoys looking at pretty women is to go against one's nature, a self distructive and non-natural activity. If you must know, yes I am athiest, but as hard as you may find it to believe I also have morals.