Strangely enough, my opinions aren't influenced by chemicals. Eric manages to piss me off mightily without chemical assistence simply with his blithe assumption that he can or does speak for a single "community".
I view him as a self appointed personality spokesman, a marketeer trying to sell free (beer/speech) by pretending that open can play nicely with closed. I far prefer RMS's particular brand of brutal honest. ERS just bugs the tits off of me, because what, when it comes down to it, is his purpose on this planet? It seems to be nothing but writing diatribes and raking in the cash.
Well, sure, but where does he get off by speaking for Linus, and lumping his OSI bitches in with the FSF as part of "our community". I'll say it here and now: OSI is a crock, Eric is a crackpot. He's like RMS but without the pretentions of integrity, just a nutter with no real agenda. I'm not prepared to back him up in a slap fight against an eight year old, let alone throw my lot in with his in a legal fight with rabid SCO lawyers.
Linus, yes. RMS, maybe. But Eric? Piss off. I'm delighted to be able to confirm that SCOs enemies are independent, not groupthinkers.
I think you miscomprehend my point. That quote is exactly what I'm pissed off about. If Linus agrees with Eric on some points, then Linus can say so. Where does Eric get off with saying that "Linus Torvalds is backing me on this"? What's "this"? The vaguely sinister threat? And what's this "backing me" shit? Like Linus is the sidekick now? Silent Bob to Eric's Jay? Garth to his Wayne? Robin to his Batman?
Oh wise and all knowing Magic 8 Ball, will this debate be fruitful?
Concentrate and ask again.
Hmm, perhaps a little vague. Will this ethical debate drag on for years?
Signs point to yes.
And while we debate whether we should use it or not, will the technology be put into production in some foreign asspit who don't give a mouthful of spit about ethical issues?
You may rely on it.
And after that happens, will we terminate our debate on the basis that the cat is out of the bag, and that American industry needs to compete or be destroyed by the Foreign Menace?
Most likely.
And after this happens, will the hissy fitters who predicted the imminent end of the world over this suddenly forget their claims, and instead find a new technology to shriek and gnash their teeth over, as they always do?
Better not tell you now.
Thank you, Magic 8 Ball, your answers are most enlightening.
Seth, you're really starting to piss me off. I should shoot that high horse right out from under you. I have a gang under my command, and we know where you live and work. If you don't shut up, I guarantee that you won't like what we're cooking up to use against you.
Go on, defend my right to say that. Smile as you do it.
Bullshit. Next you'll be saying that there's better things to do than sit around [drinking | smoking weed | masturbating to zombie donkey porn] and code all the fucking time.
Slightly less facetiously, replace with "painting" or "composing music". MUD coding is hedonistic navel gazing that occasionally benefits others. But if we can't afford to do that by now, then what the hell was the industrial revolution and automation all about? We've destroyed traditional crafts; are we really doomed to a future of mindless button pushing and a vicious produce/consume cycle?
>Eric only said what is on the mind of everyone in the free software/open source movement.
Speak for yourself. I'd rather that he didn't speak for me, nor for Linus. I'm not minded to lower myself to SCO's level by making vague "Why I oughta..." threats. By making that threat, he's just given SCO more ammunition for their paranoid ravings. Nice one.
Take a blue pill, Eric. Who do you think you're speaking for? What is your "alliance" cooking up next? An 10% increase in the amount of outrage on Slashdot? 15% more "IANAL, but somewun shood sew SCO!!!!" posts? Ooh, how about a "yeah, us too, they're, like, bad men" rider on IBM or Red Hat's counter-suits?
I for one would really like to know what ESR and his OSI disciples are "cooking up". We've heard enough bullshit and veiled threats from SCO over this matter. I am simply not interested in being associated with someone prepared to lower himself to their level in that respect.
Put up or shut up, Eric. And while you're at it, don't drag Linus into this. He's a big boy, he can speak for himself.
Why should they? It would cost them more. You seem to be confusing them with some form of public service.
If you want it to cost them more to get it wrong, then file suit against them, if you think you have a case. If you can't find anything to sue them for, then perhaps you coul dhave a think about what that might imply about their duty - or otherwise - to accept packets from you.
I'm being completely straight. If a private tax paying company pays to dig up the road and put a cable in, what right do you believe that you have to get a connection to it, let alone a connection on your terms?
If you don't like their terms, set up your own company, pay your own taxes, and pay to dig up the road and put your own cable in. When that becomes illegal, get back to us.
If AOL suck so much, how come they have so many customers?
If the answer is "Because people are idiots", then why should AOL have to cut themselves off from marketing to idiots? That pretty much precludes most companies in the USA from making a profit.
I think you've just identified the problem right there. Let's make AOL magically go away. Do you think their replacement will be any different. It's the customers, stoopid.
You're thinking of a criminal case, and the assumption of innocence. In a civil case, it's about balance of probability, and the probability in this case appears to be that C I Host are scum. They get no assumption of innocence, either legally or ethically.
Can you afford a lawyer to file a suit and associated subpoenas? You don't actually have to go to court, but you can at least make them put up or shut up.
I actually hope that AOL says "Yes, we're trying to put them out of business. Because they're a fucking spamhaus." and then fights it every inch of the way. If spamhausen get the message that they can abuse the law to survive, then we can expect to have our pennis'es enlarjed for years.
Why are we assuming that this will stop at LANs? What's so special about CAT-5? If we're talking about devices that can communicate with my PC then transfer that on, I can see a USB card reader, two digital cameras, a camcorder, and an iPAQ from where I sit. Do I have to pay twice for my wired LAN and my 802.11b cards? You can network over USB and IEEE 1394. Oh no, every machine that I've got has parallel and serial ports, and I've got the legacy cables to use them. Is my webcam a "communication system"? What about my joystick? Steering wheel? Speakers? Monitor? If not, why not? If I have to pay the same tax on a 10Mb hub as a 100Mb or 1Gb one, why not on a serial port?
Needless to say, I'm sure that all these questions have already been thought about by the dedicated and informed legislators of Florida. In fact, they've probably been discussed at great length, over many working lunches, in many of the better hotels and restaurants across that great state.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe.
Strangely enough, my opinions aren't influenced by chemicals. Eric manages to piss me off mightily without chemical assistence simply with his blithe assumption that he can or does speak for a single "community".
I view him as a self appointed personality spokesman, a marketeer trying to sell free (beer/speech) by pretending that open can play nicely with closed. I far prefer RMS's particular brand of brutal honest. ERS just bugs the tits off of me, because what, when it comes down to it, is his purpose on this planet? It seems to be nothing but writing diatribes and raking in the cash.
Are we clear now?
>[Foreigners] are violent, compulsive liars.
No we're not. For saying that, die you must.
Do you have any idea what "Slashdot" is?
Implied: why bother reading any of their crap?
Well, sure, but where does he get off by speaking for Linus, and lumping his OSI bitches in with the FSF as part of "our community". I'll say it here and now: OSI is a crock, Eric is a crackpot. He's like RMS but without the pretentions of integrity, just a nutter with no real agenda. I'm not prepared to back him up in a slap fight against an eight year old, let alone throw my lot in with his in a legal fight with rabid SCO lawyers.
Linus, yes. RMS, maybe. But Eric? Piss off. I'm delighted to be able to confirm that SCOs enemies are independent, not groupthinkers.
I think you miscomprehend my point. That quote is exactly what I'm pissed off about. If Linus agrees with Eric on some points, then Linus can say so. Where does Eric get off with saying that "Linus Torvalds is backing me on this"? What's "this"? The vaguely sinister threat? And what's this "backing me" shit? Like Linus is the sidekick now? Silent Bob to Eric's Jay? Garth to his Wayne? Robin to his Batman?
Oh wise and all knowing Magic 8 Ball, will this debate be fruitful?
Concentrate and ask again.
Hmm, perhaps a little vague. Will this ethical debate drag on for years?
Signs point to yes.
And while we debate whether we should use it or not, will the technology be put into production in some foreign asspit who don't give a mouthful of spit about ethical issues?
You may rely on it.
And after that happens, will we terminate our debate on the basis that the cat is out of the bag, and that American industry needs to compete or be destroyed by the Foreign Menace?
Most likely.
And after this happens, will the hissy fitters who predicted the imminent end of the world over this suddenly forget their claims, and instead find a new technology to shriek and gnash their teeth over, as they always do?
Better not tell you now.
Thank you, Magic 8 Ball, your answers are most enlightening.
Seth, you're really starting to piss me off. I should shoot that high horse right out from under you. I have a gang under my command, and we know where you live and work. If you don't shut up, I guarantee that you won't like what we're cooking up to use against you.
Go on, defend my right to say that. Smile as you do it.
Bullshit. Next you'll be saying that there's better things to do than sit around [drinking | smoking weed | masturbating to zombie donkey porn] and code all the fucking time.
Slightly less facetiously, replace with "painting" or "composing music". MUD coding is hedonistic navel gazing that occasionally benefits others. But if we can't afford to do that by now, then what the hell was the industrial revolution and automation all about? We've destroyed traditional crafts; are we really doomed to a future of mindless button pushing and a vicious produce/consume cycle?
>Eric only said what is on the mind of everyone in the free software/open source movement.
Speak for yourself. I'd rather that he didn't speak for me, nor for Linus. I'm not minded to lower myself to SCO's level by making vague "Why I oughta..." threats. By making that threat, he's just given SCO more ammunition for their paranoid ravings. Nice one.
Take a blue pill, Eric. Who do you think you're speaking for? What is your "alliance" cooking up next? An 10% increase in the amount of outrage on Slashdot? 15% more "IANAL, but somewun shood sew SCO!!!!" posts? Ooh, how about a "yeah, us too, they're, like, bad men" rider on IBM or Red Hat's counter-suits?
I for one would really like to know what ESR and his OSI disciples are "cooking up". We've heard enough bullshit and veiled threats from SCO over this matter. I am simply not interested in being associated with someone prepared to lower himself to their level in that respect.
Put up or shut up, Eric. And while you're at it, don't drag Linus into this. He's a big boy, he can speak for himself.
Why should they? It would cost them more. You seem to be confusing them with some form of public service.
If you want it to cost them more to get it wrong, then file suit against them, if you think you have a case. If you can't find anything to sue them for, then perhaps you coul dhave a think about what that might imply about their duty - or otherwise - to accept packets from you.
I'm being completely straight. If a private tax paying company pays to dig up the road and put a cable in, what right do you believe that you have to get a connection to it, let alone a connection on your terms?
If you don't like their terms, set up your own company, pay your own taxes, and pay to dig up the road and put your own cable in. When that becomes illegal, get back to us.
What if the overly zealous ISP also happens to own the only broadband pipe that runs past your house?
Then you get to choose whether to give them your money or not. Tell me, do you believe that 'net access is a right?
"one of our mail servers [...] was allowing open relay (but was never used for nefarious purposes)"
Translation: "I'm too dumb to secure an open relay, but I'm clue enough to know what it was used for."
Don't tell us that you're a cretin, then expect us to give your side of the story any credit.
Translation: "My netblock neighbors are morons. Why can't AOL fix them?"
Then tell them to stop. You have done that, right?
If AOL suck so much, how come they have so many customers?
If the answer is "Because people are idiots", then why should AOL have to cut themselves off from marketing to idiots? That pretty much precludes most companies in the USA from making a profit.
How long exactly? What problems have you had? How were they resolved? What are you using it for?
the clueless AOLer reports it as SPAM
I think you've just identified the problem right there. Let's make AOL magically go away. Do you think their replacement will be any different. It's the customers, stoopid.
How long? What do you use them for? What problems have you had and how were they resolved?
You're thinking of a criminal case, and the assumption of innocence. In a civil case, it's about balance of probability, and the probability in this case appears to be that C I Host are scum. They get no assumption of innocence, either legally or ethically.
Can you afford a lawyer to file a suit and associated subpoenas? You don't actually have to go to court, but you can at least make them put up or shut up.
I actually hope that AOL says "Yes, we're trying to put them out of business. Because they're a fucking spamhaus." and then fights it every inch of the way. If spamhausen get the message that they can abuse the law to survive, then we can expect to have our pennis'es enlarjed for years.
Why are we assuming that this will stop at LANs? What's so special about CAT-5? If we're talking about devices that can communicate with my PC then transfer that on, I can see a USB card reader, two digital cameras, a camcorder, and an iPAQ from where I sit. Do I have to pay twice for my wired LAN and my 802.11b cards? You can network over USB and IEEE 1394. Oh no, every machine that I've got has parallel and serial ports, and I've got the legacy cables to use them. Is my webcam a "communication system"? What about my joystick? Steering wheel? Speakers? Monitor? If not, why not? If I have to pay the same tax on a 10Mb hub as a 100Mb or 1Gb one, why not on a serial port?
Needless to say, I'm sure that all these questions have already been thought about by the dedicated and informed legislators of Florida. In fact, they've probably been discussed at great length, over many working lunches, in many of the better hotels and restaurants across that great state.