I just don't get it. I too am on a provider (Cogeco in Canada) who explicitly prohibits running any server in their 5-page AUP.
Imagine, if you will, Bell giving you a phone that can only be used outbound. No incoming phone calls. If you get one, you are disconnected. Preposterous.
The thing that's missing is $$$. If we were charged for incoming connections by the byte, we'd be required, not allowed, to run servers.
Err.. so now we have you (whoever you are) determining who gets full access to the Internet? How do you think all of us here got our experience? If we only allow experienced users rather than people who have just installed Linux for the first time, who determines when they know enough? What, we introduce an exam? Who sets the syllabus? The government? Who takes the exam? MS? An MSCE required? Or knowledge of IPX? Or NetBIOS? Can we discriminate?
I run servers too where I am not allowed to. Because, like most, I have no alternative. Cable or dialup. No ISDN possible here, no ADSL no leased lines. Why do you trhink they can behave like nazis in the first place? Because we have no choice!
I think that if you get more Open Source adoption, you get more Open Source development.
Also, it seems to me that development of apps that run on Open Source Operating SYstems (GNU/Linux) lead to adoptions of these operating systems. In fact, the lack of apps is the one major thing holding back Linux and with it, Open Source.
Indeed, market forces are real, and it's not a bad thing that web sites are not immune to this. "Immune to market forces" usually means "communism", "fascism", or any of a nyumber of other "-isms".
But that is not to say that dishonesty is warranted. If you are a commercial organisation, admit it. If you do "advertorials", then call them advertorials. At least most journalists try to be honest, and pointing out where they are not is a good thing, I think.
Michael
Wasted? It's like airplane seats: once it's not used, it's gone forever. Not a renewable resource. If a particular pipe is 90% full as opposed to 10% full, there's very little difference.
So unless it caused noticable congestion it makes no difference in that respect.
I know myself... have a very short attention span. I am greatly effective at any one task for a few minutes, then interest fades.
By Multitasking furiously I prevent my mind from getting bored. I am typing this now; on to a work related email next, then read a bit of a book about advertising copy and layout, then to this month's Linux Journal, and so on. Some of us work very effectively this way. More of us than you would imagine, I think/
...the point is, IBM are indeed super lawyered-up. The perception is, you need a lwayer for this stuff. And that will hurt the adoption of Open Source.
Take my company, for instance. We have one product that runs on an Open Source platform. To see where we stand legally, I would really like a lawyer to look at it. And who needs that? Yet is it necessary, as one day soon a competitir may call and say "can I have your source code please?" - and we need to then know what to do. The FUD is based on some real facts.
...is that no search engine covers more than 16% of the web. are the authors confusing the "hiiden web" (i.e. web-based databases, such as newspaper articles) with network topology, which is what they are concerned with? I would have thought that google covers most of the web (in terms of topology), not 16% of it.
Michael
For instance, I would like Linux to be used even by people who sell proprietary apps. If they cannot do this for fear of having to Open Source those proprietary apps, Linux will not take off. This is the FUD that MS is sowing, and it needs to be answered with real argument, not with complaints about slavery and non-sentences like "What will your worthless intellectual property going to support you then?".
Those real arguments could be, for instance: "Point out which elements in a typical distro you can use without having to Open Source your proprietary app." We can be constructive and in doing so, achieve much more free software adoption.
Stallman, as always, raises interesting points about "free" versus "open source".
Important, becuase I increasingly see entrepreneurs (and even Linux developers) confuse the two. Which is not a good thing. With more and more proprietary devices based on open source software, we will probably see some big time confusing situations soon. Which is grist to the mill for Microsoft, who are happily sowing the "GPL is a virus" FUD.
Not that it is ALL of it FUD! We all want our employers to pay us, so we all want them to make money - enough to do that anyway. And for many companies, software is a large part of what they earn, and of their competitive advantage. Which is what enables them to earn that money.
Since we cannot all change our business models immediately, there are legitimate reasons (imho) for some companies to charge for software. And with more and more open source being used, there will be situations where suddenly, people realise they can no longer do that. Time, I'd say, for everyone to re-read the GPL.
It is all relative. I feel I need to add a disclaimer here: I understand that being assaulted is horrible, terrible, heartwrenchingly painful, is with you for life, and so on. I am not minimising that.
But surely you cannot be serious. You would not rather have your kid killed rather than raped. This is an example of how we have lost sight, as a society, of the relative severity of these offences.
I have two small kids myself. If they were assaulted against their will I would gladly kill the perpetrator with my bare hands. But there is NO WAY that I would rather have them dead than assaulted. It does not even come close.
Michael
I used to install telephone switches in the 80s, in the Libyan desert. These were loaded in 30 minutes using paper tape. I know what "pathcing" really means: the platic pastch tape you stick over incorrect holes or over breaks.
Point being, these things no doubt still run. Papertape is very durable in adverse conditions. Like deserts with sand storms and 120 F temperatures.
Well, we can argue about this one for days, weeks, years: philosophers do this. Bertrand Russell defined good as that which (I paraphrase) gives most overall net pleasure to humankind. I owuld say "bad is what hurts other people".
But that is my definition. Your mileage may vary. "Right" and "wrong" are tough to define. That's what society is for. So maybe I should say "societally undesirable".
You target the wrong guy: I am not being bigoted (notice the spelling) at all. On the contrary, I am advocating free debate (rather than unfree taboo) to come up with the answers.
Well, I think you know I mean "to all intents and purposes". That means we can all probably agree that there are things that are not so good. Rape, maybe, or murder, or even child abuse.
My point was not this, though. My point is exactly what you seem to be pointing out: these things should be nit "given", but arrived at through rational discussion.
Fwiw, I strongly disagree. On two points: I think that there is a taboo on discussing it, and I think there is a lot to discuss.
It is very much a taboo. Even a show about it raises moral objections from the masses. A murderer gets complimented in jail; a pedophile gets murdered. My simple reply (in which btw I said I though pedophilia was distasteful!) elicited a "you sick fuck child rapist" response. Need I say more?
There is a LOT to discuss. Is it indeed harmful? To whom? Can we minimise its incidenmce? Can we minimise its harm? Why are some people pedophiles? HOw can we minimise any harm caused? How should released pedophiles return to society? What therapies work best? Is the Internet bad for allwoing free communication? Should the Internet be banned becuase it contains child sex pictures? Is the harm partly or wholly culturally caused? I could go on for a while - and all these questions are taboo, as they generally just receive reactions like that one response to my post I saw that just saud "you sick fuck child rapist". That was a typical reponse not to a pedophile but to someone merely responding to a post ABOUT the subject! And that is what we should fix, and that is what the show no doubt hopes to achieve.
Who exactly decides what is legitimate for entertainment purposes? Only by free discussion can we work this out.
At my last company we the joke policy was amended to preclude jokes that referred to race, religion, politics, sex, and sexuality: leaving exactly nothing to joke about. I would say that jokes about touchy subjects are very much legitimate.
Which evidence says that discussing distasteful subjects makes us immune to them? I have seen many cop shows but am no more likely to murder anyone, or accept anyone murdering anyone, as a result.
Well, good questions by you and others here: Why is pedophilia bad?
It's off topic, but here's my opinion: I believe there is some body of evidence that suggests that children having sex with adults can indeed lead to emotional damage later on. Indeed, this may well be wholly or partly cultural (Pedophilia appears not to have done the old Greeks much harm, for instance), but of course our kids do live in our culture.
I suppose we could debate this - legitimate debate by the way! - but I think it's off topic here. Still, I quite agree we COULD, and SHOULD BE ABLE TO, debate it. Otherwise once again we get stuck with irrational opinions and fears - that is exactly what taboos achieve.
Michael
Pedophilia is today's taboo, and I think taboos are best investigated and questioned.
Sure, it is a horrible subject: grown people should nothave sex with children. But pedophilia is by no means worse than murder. Yet murder is a legitimate subject for satire, comedy, thrillers, whodunnits: a whole industry has sprung up around it. Ask P.D. James, or read about Kinsey Millhone.
Pedophilia on te other hand is a taboo; today's taboo. Taboo subjects are subjects "not legitimate for discussion". "Taboo" implies a certain amount of irrationality. This should worry free thinking people. Past taboos have included non-Catholic religion, madness, witchcraft, sexuality, nudity, homosexuality (male and female), the earth turning around the sun, women having the same number of teeth as men, and so on.
When a subject is taboo, it is legitimate to investigate it. I would say, it is crucial. It is how progress in society is made.
Yes, sometimes that means investigating distasteful subjects. But the alternative is worse: a society run on the basis of fear, superstition, and unstated interests. That's not where I want to live.
I just called Dell to ask if they would sell me a PC without OS. The answer was "NO": all Dell desktop PCs have to have Windows on them.
The sales guy was out to lunch: he said "you are cheaper off this way". I said no, Linux was free. He said "No, RedHat and so on are not free". When I tried to explain RedHat could be downloaded free, he said "No way. How else would they stay in business?".
I am a Canadian resident who has an account with FIDO, the Canadian GSM provider. I have a Motorola 3-band phone - use it worldwide (UK, Hong Kong, Holland, India, Australia, USA, etc). And SMS does usually work - over the past year it has gone from about 60% working in different countries (receiving as well as sending) to about 80%. So the providers are clearly working on interoperability.
Michael
---
Good to hear we have another satellite! I (aka VA3MVW) used to digipeat via MIR, and the feeling that I was talking from Toronto to, say, Texas via space station MIR was fascinating. Using simple equipment too - simple 2m VHF, with a simple TNC (I have a few for sale btw: I use 3 and own 5)...
Ham radio is not dead - one use that/.ers should like is TCP/IP over AX.25 packet. Meaning, when my cable provider is down (happens a few times a week) I can get out (or in!) via packet radio. Telnet to a server 25 miles away from home, and standard TCP/IP from there; a ham's IP address being issued by ampr.org.
Then there's emergency radio (ice storms, tornadoes, etc), and talking to people kin your car: I spend hours talking away while stuck in traffic jams. And it's all free.:)
...and driven around London, I am afraid this WILL happen. Already London has speed cameras about every 500 yards on main roads! VERY frightening is the fact that no-one questions this big brother stuff. Many Brits I asked all talk about how the danger to little kids etc necessitates this. Britain used to be a bastion if civil liberties: now it is (to my eyes) more and more directive - almost fascist. Cameras watch you everywhere (not just on the roads; in shops etc too)
If we suggest a policeman in every car, they'd accept that too. Very, very frightening.
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine, if you will, Bell giving you a phone that can only be used outbound. No incoming phone calls. If you get one, you are disconnected. Preposterous.
The thing that's missing is $$$. If we were charged for incoming connections by the byte, we'd be required, not allowed, to run servers.
Michael
I see plenty of trouble ahead if we go your way.
Michael
I run servers too where I am not allowed to. Because, like most, I have no alternative. Cable or dialup. No ISDN possible here, no ADSL no leased lines. Why do you trhink they can behave like nazis in the first place? Because we have no choice!
Also, it seems to me that development of apps that run on Open Source Operating SYstems (GNU/Linux) lead to adoptions of these operating systems. In fact, the lack of apps is the one major thing holding back Linux and with it, Open Source.
Michael
But that is not to say that dishonesty is warranted. If you are a commercial organisation, admit it. If you do "advertorials", then call them advertorials. At least most journalists try to be honest, and pointing out where they are not is a good thing, I think. Michael
So unless it caused noticable congestion it makes no difference in that respect.
By Multitasking furiously I prevent my mind from getting bored. I am typing this now; on to a work related email next, then read a bit of a book about advertising copy and layout, then to this month's Linux Journal, and so on. Some of us work very effectively this way. More of us than you would imagine, I think/
Michael
Take my company, for instance. We have one product that runs on an Open Source platform. To see where we stand legally, I would really like a lawyer to look at it. And who needs that? Yet is it necessary, as one day soon a competitir may call and say "can I have your source code please?" - and we need to then know what to do. The FUD is based on some real facts.
Michael
...is that no search engine covers more than 16% of the web. are the authors confusing the "hiiden web" (i.e. web-based databases, such as newspaper articles) with network topology, which is what they are concerned with? I would have thought that google covers most of the web (in terms of topology), not 16% of it. Michael
For instance, I would like Linux to be used even by people who sell proprietary apps. If they cannot do this for fear of having to Open Source those proprietary apps, Linux will not take off. This is the FUD that MS is sowing, and it needs to be answered with real argument, not with complaints about slavery and non-sentences like "What will your worthless intellectual property going to support you then?".
Those real arguments could be, for instance: "Point out which elements in a typical distro you can use without having to Open Source your proprietary app." We can be constructive and in doing so, achieve much more free software adoption.
Michael
Important, becuase I increasingly see entrepreneurs (and even Linux developers) confuse the two. Which is not a good thing. With more and more proprietary devices based on open source software, we will probably see some big time confusing situations soon. Which is grist to the mill for Microsoft, who are happily sowing the "GPL is a virus" FUD.
Not that it is ALL of it FUD! We all want our employers to pay us, so we all want them to make money - enough to do that anyway. And for many companies, software is a large part of what they earn, and of their competitive advantage. Which is what enables them to earn that money.
Since we cannot all change our business models immediately, there are legitimate reasons (imho) for some companies to charge for software. And with more and more open source being used, there will be situations where suddenly, people realise they can no longer do that. Time, I'd say, for everyone to re-read the GPL.
Michael
But surely you cannot be serious. You would not rather have your kid killed rather than raped. This is an example of how we have lost sight, as a society, of the relative severity of these offences.
I have two small kids myself. If they were assaulted against their will I would gladly kill the perpetrator with my bare hands. But there is NO WAY that I would rather have them dead than assaulted. It does not even come close. Michael
Point being, these things no doubt still run. Papertape is very durable in adverse conditions. Like deserts with sand storms and 120 F temperatures.
But that is my definition. Your mileage may vary. "Right" and "wrong" are tough to define. That's what society is for. So maybe I should say "societally undesirable".
You target the wrong guy: I am not being bigoted (notice the spelling) at all. On the contrary, I am advocating free debate (rather than unfree taboo) to come up with the answers.
Michael
My point was not this, though. My point is exactly what you seem to be pointing out: these things should be nit "given", but arrived at through rational discussion.
Michael
- It is very much a taboo. Even a show about it raises moral objections from the masses. A murderer gets complimented in jail; a pedophile gets murdered. My simple reply (in which btw I said I though pedophilia was distasteful!) elicited a "you sick fuck child rapist" response. Need I say more?
- There is a LOT to discuss. Is it indeed harmful? To whom? Can we minimise its incidenmce? Can we minimise its harm? Why are some people pedophiles? HOw can we minimise any harm caused? How should released pedophiles return to society? What therapies work best? Is the Internet bad for allwoing free communication? Should the Internet be banned becuase it contains child sex pictures? Is the harm partly or wholly culturally caused? I could go on for a while - and all these questions are taboo, as they generally just receive reactions like that one response to my post I saw that just saud "you sick fuck child rapist". That was a typical reponse not to a pedophile but to someone merely responding to a post ABOUT the subject! And that is what we should fix, and that is what the show no doubt hopes to achieve.
Michael- Who exactly decides what is legitimate for entertainment purposes? Only by free discussion can we work this out.
- At my last company we the joke policy was amended to preclude jokes that referred to race, religion, politics, sex, and sexuality: leaving exactly nothing to joke about. I would say that jokes about touchy subjects are very much legitimate.
- Which evidence says that discussing distasteful subjects makes us immune to them? I have seen many cop shows but am no more likely to murder anyone, or accept anyone murdering anyone, as a result.
MichaelIt's off topic, but here's my opinion: I believe there is some body of evidence that suggests that children having sex with adults can indeed lead to emotional damage later on. Indeed, this may well be wholly or partly cultural (Pedophilia appears not to have done the old Greeks much harm, for instance), but of course our kids do live in our culture.
I suppose we could debate this - legitimate debate by the way! - but I think it's off topic here. Still, I quite agree we COULD, and SHOULD BE ABLE TO, debate it. Otherwise once again we get stuck with irrational opinions and fears - that is exactly what taboos achieve. Michael
Sure, it is a horrible subject: grown people should nothave sex with children. But pedophilia is by no means worse than murder. Yet murder is a legitimate subject for satire, comedy, thrillers, whodunnits: a whole industry has sprung up around it. Ask P.D. James, or read about Kinsey Millhone.
Pedophilia on te other hand is a taboo; today's taboo. Taboo subjects are subjects "not legitimate for discussion". "Taboo" implies a certain amount of irrationality. This should worry free thinking people. Past taboos have included non-Catholic religion, madness, witchcraft, sexuality, nudity, homosexuality (male and female), the earth turning around the sun, women having the same number of teeth as men, and so on.
When a subject is taboo, it is legitimate to investigate it. I would say, it is crucial. It is how progress in society is made.
Yes, sometimes that means investigating distasteful subjects. But the alternative is worse: a society run on the basis of fear, superstition, and unstated interests. That's not where I want to live.
Michael
Michael
---
The sales guy was out to lunch: he said "you are cheaper off this way". I said no, Linux was free. He said "No, RedHat and so on are not free". When I tried to explain RedHat could be downloaded free, he said "No way. How else would they stay in business?".
Clueless!
---
I am a Canadian resident who has an account with FIDO, the Canadian GSM provider. I have a Motorola 3-band phone - use it worldwide (UK, Hong Kong, Holland, India, Australia, USA, etc). And SMS does usually work - over the past year it has gone from about 60% working in different countries (receiving as well as sending) to about 80%. So the providers are clearly working on interoperability. Michael
---
Ham radio is not dead - one use that /.ers should like is TCP/IP over AX.25 packet. Meaning, when my cable provider is down (happens a few times a week) I can get out (or in!) via packet radio. Telnet to a server 25 miles away from home, and standard TCP/IP from there; a ham's IP address being issued by ampr.org.
Then there's emergency radio (ice storms, tornadoes, etc), and talking to people kin your car: I spend hours talking away while stuck in traffic jams. And it's all free. :)
73,
Mike
---
If we suggest a policeman in every car, they'd accept that too. Very, very frightening.
Michael
---
whois slashdot.org
And you see
SLASHDOT.ORG.SUCKS.COMPARED.TO.JIMPHILLIPS.ORG
Seems that Microsoft, Yahoo, Amazon etc are not the only ones with egg on their faces. Cmdr Taco has been affected by this particular phenomenon too.
Michael
---