If they have any interest in achieving their goal, shouldn't they be sending a loud message to the rest of the world, inviting like-minded individuals to come live there instead?
Sometimes, after trying for a long enough time, you realize that even if it were worth the effort, it will never change anything anyway. This may sound defeatist, cynical or even clinically depressed (check, check and big check), but it's the truth. I mean, when is enough enough? I've tried. I've voted. I've written letters to my representatives. I've donated to worthy causes. I've even tried to have some enlightened conversations. It just isn't working, and the environment keeps getting more and more hostile. Many times I've considered emmigrating, especially to a secular/atheist country (if I can find one). The only reason I haven't is I have a wife who won't leave (that's another story). So, I'll keep trying because I have nothing better to do and because it's the right thing to do.
Oh, wait. That would involve effort. Never mind - I forgot who I was talking about.
Fuck you. Fuck you and your lousy generalizations. Try seeing beyond what your TV feeds you, you arrogant prick. What have you done to improve your community or country today?
Despite the opinions of many Californians I've met, the universe does not revolve solely around them, or their state.
And neither does it revolve around you or your state.
There are no water shortages in my area, and I have no desire to switch to a different design of toilet that wouldn't have any advantage to me and would just mean a lot of additional complexity, and I would take a very dim view of any legislation that tried to force this. If people who choose to live in places essentially unsuited to human habitation have problems with their water supply, obviously their governments should address these issues.
Oh, you mean like New Orleans? Maybe we should just tell them they are screwed because they chose to live somewhere "unsuited to human habitation" when they are "having problems with their water supply". Tell you what, the next time your area becomes "unsuited to human habitation" due to whatever reason, we'll tell you to suck it up and "deal with it on the local municipal level". Also, southern California and the Southwestern states are far from the only places that have problems with water shortages - I know for a fact that Iowa has had droughts that require them to "let it mellow if it's yellow".
Look, I know you're just trying to get out of buying a new toilet, and that's fine and all, I can understand that. But try to think for a moment: why waste water unnecessarily? The next time you are in the market for a toilet, why not buy one that uses less water? Are you that much of an asshole that you want to waste natural resources unnecessarily?
During WWII, Winston Churchill put it best. To paraphrase: The Americans, when all other options have been exhausted, will do the right thing.
Why's everybody always picking on us Americans (besides the fact that our President is an ass)? I tend to think that a shortness of vision is not limited to Americans, and prefer the following:
History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives.
-- Abba Eban
WTF? I read "American Gods". It was crap. Not the worst thing I've ever read, but pap fiction nonetheless. I had heard rave reviews of it for years and finally decided to pick it up. Unfortunately, I also bought it. I'm convinced now that the rave reviews were all Neil Gaiman comic book fanboys, and if there's one thing I can't stand, it's comic books masquerading as serious fiction.
Same thing for "Small Gods". I love Pratchett, but "Small Gods" was pretty pathetic. Maybe I just can't relate to any "gods" novels because I'm an atheist, but I loved "Good Omens", and plenty of other Pratchett stuff ("Soul Music" comes to mind).
Plus, where's Egan's "Diaspora"? Or Stephenson's "Cryptonomicon"? I'll admit I'm not that well read in sci-fi, but Diaspora and Cryptonomicon are both geekier and beat "American Gods" hands down.
Human beings are nowhere near as smart as they could be, and are probably not capable of thinking things out clearly enough. As it stands, we probably need mental crutches like fear until we are able to augment our intelligence.
Speak for yourself! I think that if someone is so stupid that fear is the only thing keeping them from shooting his or her self in the head, they probably should be dead. Call me an elitist, I'm just sick of stupid people and think this world has far too many of them.
Q: Should Linux have a binary kernel driver layer?
A: No. Next question.
But seriously, if we wanted binary only proprietary drivers, we'd be running Windows or MacOS. If you can't play by the rules, then fuck off. It's called OPEN SOURCE for a reason. Furthermore, if you are a hardware company, what do you care about the client side software? Are you selling hardware? Or are you really a shitty closed source software company in disguise? Note: this goes for you all hardware companies that pull this shit (I'm looking at you, ATI, with your buggy closed source user level "driver" libraries. Nvidia is only slightly better because their drivers don't crash on a switch between X and console).
. . . but to generalize their contribution to modern computing as nothing more than theft and good marketing is pure garbage.
Really? And how, exactly, would you generalize their contribution to modern computing? Please, enlighten us, for all the evidence I have seen has pointed precisely to Microsoft being nothing more than thieves and marketers.
The Online Freedom of Speech Act was defeated in the House of Representatives yesterday.
Huh. When I saw FOS I thought "Full Of Shit". Then I read the summary, and wondered why Democrats, who are largely in favor of freedom of speech, would be opposed to this bill. Then I read the article, and I realized that not only was my first thought correct (this bill is full of shit), but that indeed it could apply to the article summary as well. I guess balancing things out means we have to post lies from the other side every once in a while. Only problem is, what if you're not on either side and just interested in truth?
Lawyers are not the cause of this problem. Lawyers are paid money to argue for their clients interests (or perceived interests). If the MPAA pays money to a good lawyer and gives them instructions, that lawyer goes and researches the law, determines what tactics will be effective, and ASKS THE CLIENT FOR FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS. It is the client who decides to go ahead and sue a grandfather for $400K, and the client who decides to lobby Washington.
I'll grant you that the real problem is with the RIAA/MPAA, and that lawyers can be viewed as only tools and there are good and bad uses they can be put to. But think about that for a moment: are you really arguing that lawyers (including yourself) are only tools? Are you a tool?
Granted, like I said before, the problem isn't lawyers, and not all lawyers are bad. But they can make choices. And they can refuse to work for a client, no matter how good the money. Others have put it better, but basically these lawyers working for the RIAA and MPAA are sacrificing our long term freedoms to make a little extra cash.
And just to quickly refute your other arguments and passing of the buck: I vote, I've never voted for these incumbent scumbags, I write my representives on an almost weekly basis, I give very little money to the RIAA/MPAA, and I pay my taxes, but unless you are willing to defend me pro bono for not paying taxes, I'm afraid I'm not willing to go to jail for this cause.
No. I'm a big fan of personal responsibility and believe that everyone has a choice (even when that choice is one in which doing the right thing gets you killed). However, it seems highly appropriate that one form of DRM is being used to subvert another. It seems to me that if "The Warden" is not DRM (or doesn't incorporate it) then it is only about one small step away from being such, and definitely is objectionable on the same basis. Hmm, software subverting software? Where have I seen this before? That's right, it was spyware removing other spyware. It was only a matter of time before the companies caught on. The only difference between sociopathic scum and companies is that companies aren't as smart and don't catch on as quickly.
Ben Knauss calls it 'innovation in its purest form, without ego, money or fame as its goal.'
Hey, wow, that sounds really neat! I could of sworn I've heard about something else like this before, though. I think it was called "open sores" or something like that. Some kid from Bork-a-Bisk-a-Bork land was working on some game called "Lunix", only he not only used IRC but this thing call Ooozenet, I think. Wonder if these #winprog guys have ever heard about any of that?
(To the sarcastically impaired, no I don't want to hear your replies, corrections or criticisms. TWAJS, and I was only trying to point out that this is nothing new, only the Windows dweebs think they invented it).
Lincoln didn't even say that until four score and seven years after the Revolutionary War.
Does that make it any less valid? Besides, I think he may have just been clarifying the following:
We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The Seal of the President, Senate, Vice-President,etc are NOT the property of the people of the USA they are the property of the government of the USA and there is a major difference between thoses two.
So I guess the phrase "a government of the people, by the people and for the people" means nothing to you? WTF is wrong with this country when the government is held to be a higher, "special", separate class from the governed? WTF happened to free speech?
I think you forget that Ads are paying for the content of whatever page you are reading...including this one.
I've seen this bullshit excuse for ads far too many times. Here's a thought: maybe the people selling advertising space realize that their content isn't valuable enough for people to pay for, so they suckered the advertisers into subsidizing them. Not that I'm not blaming advertisers, but the problem is at least partly caused by the so-called "content creators" who are being subsidized by them. I mean, honestly, would you pay for slashdot if you had to? Would you pay to watch sitcoms if that was the only way you could watch them? I wouldn't.
we are not seats or eyeballs or end users or consumers. we are human beings and our reach exceeds your grasp. deal with it.
-- "The Cluetrain Manifesto", Christopher Locke
Christopher Locke puts it so much better than I can, but basically, they're my eyes, and I didn't sell them to you. I've already payed for my Internet connection and I'm not going to waste my time on one more soul-destroying, time-wasting piece of trash that has no purpose other than to steal my money, which I have earned with time from my life I will never get back. Ads steal my life, and they don't give anything in return.
Then maybe these non-developer-users should put up or shut up, ie pay for what they want or build it themselves (become true open source users).
If Linux is to make headway on the Desktop, then this is the kind of attitude that needs to go.
Maybe some of us don't give a fuck whether Linux is to "make headway on the Desktop". And maybe some of us think this "gimme, gimme, gimme" attitude of useless lusers needs to go. I mean, who the fuck do you think you are telling these people who DONATED their hard work to you what they should do. I can understand constructive criticism, but this entitlement complex is part of the reason the US is heading down the path that Rome did.
You're not the only one. I've hated macs for a long time now, although not purely on their software alone. I think if it wasn't for all the mac zealots out there, I would probably think macos okay, but the batshit mac users drive me up the walls. For all the "advice" the mac users want to give us Linux folk on how to improve and draw more users, you'd think they'd take some of their own and not drive people away by being shallow screaming morons.
Others have already corrected you on the "elitist" misperception that you have, but I want to address something else in your post:
Linux developers need to design FOR the user instead of themselves
Linux developers ARE the users. See, I've been thinking about this whole dichotomy that some people seem to want to enforce on the world by categorizing everything and putting people in their place (so to speak). For example:
consumers vs producers
politicians vs constituents
users vs developers
Open source doesn't work like that. In open source, the users are the developers and the developers are the users. There's no difference. Wouldn't it be nice if the rest of the world was like that? Wouldn't it be nice if people took on not only their Rights but also their Responsibilities? Wouldn't it be nice if there was true equality and egalitarianism and people weren't segregated into consumers and producers?
Maybe I'm just a dreamer, but I refuse to be categorized, and I refuse to be forced to live the way you choose to live. And yes, that includes ignoring your whining about what "rights" you have as a user and why open source citizens (developer-users) should kowtow to you.
The fact that the quote was publically so uncontroversial at the time says a lot.
Can I go back and live in that time? I think I'd like it better there. Sure, I'd probably miss the Internet and all, but I'd probably also have better job prospects.
whereas in the many areas where Solaris is miles ahead, the Linux community will be hard pressed to narrow the gap.
Right. That's what they said about Microsoft versus Linux.
Snottiness aside, believe it or not, there are some who will not switch away from Linux. Just as there are those who have worked with Solaris for too long and "trust" Sun, there are those who have worked with Linux for too long and trust it. Not only that, but there is always the last important deciding factor for me: is it Free as in Freedom? Linux is. Solaris ain't.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes, after trying for a long enough time, you realize that even if it were worth the effort, it will never change anything anyway. This may sound defeatist, cynical or even clinically depressed (check, check and big check), but it's the truth. I mean, when is enough enough? I've tried. I've voted. I've written letters to my representatives. I've donated to worthy causes. I've even tried to have some enlightened conversations. It just isn't working, and the environment keeps getting more and more hostile. Many times I've considered emmigrating, especially to a secular/atheist country (if I can find one). The only reason I haven't is I have a wife who won't leave (that's another story). So, I'll keep trying because I have nothing better to do and because it's the right thing to do.
Fuck you. Fuck you and your lousy generalizations. Try seeing beyond what your TV feeds you, you arrogant prick. What have you done to improve your community or country today?
And neither does it revolve around you or your state.
Oh, you mean like New Orleans? Maybe we should just tell them they are screwed because they chose to live somewhere "unsuited to human habitation" when they are "having problems with their water supply". Tell you what, the next time your area becomes "unsuited to human habitation" due to whatever reason, we'll tell you to suck it up and "deal with it on the local municipal level". Also, southern California and the Southwestern states are far from the only places that have problems with water shortages - I know for a fact that Iowa has had droughts that require them to "let it mellow if it's yellow".
Look, I know you're just trying to get out of buying a new toilet, and that's fine and all, I can understand that. But try to think for a moment: why waste water unnecessarily? The next time you are in the market for a toilet, why not buy one that uses less water? Are you that much of an asshole that you want to waste natural resources unnecessarily?
Why's everybody always picking on us Americans (besides the fact that our President is an ass)? I tend to think that a shortness of vision is not limited to Americans, and prefer the following:
Okay, I feel really stupid - they did have Cryptonomicon on there, I just missed it. I still think Neil Gaiman sucks, though ;)
Same thing for "Small Gods". I love Pratchett, but "Small Gods" was pretty pathetic. Maybe I just can't relate to any "gods" novels because I'm an atheist, but I loved "Good Omens", and plenty of other Pratchett stuff ("Soul Music" comes to mind).
Plus, where's Egan's "Diaspora"? Or Stephenson's "Cryptonomicon"? I'll admit I'm not that well read in sci-fi, but Diaspora and Cryptonomicon are both geekier and beat "American Gods" hands down.
Speak for yourself! I think that if someone is so stupid that fear is the only thing keeping them from shooting his or her self in the head, they probably should be dead. Call me an elitist, I'm just sick of stupid people and think this world has far too many of them.
A: No. Next question.
But seriously, if we wanted binary only proprietary drivers, we'd be running Windows or MacOS. If you can't play by the rules, then fuck off. It's called OPEN SOURCE for a reason. Furthermore, if you are a hardware company, what do you care about the client side software? Are you selling hardware? Or are you really a shitty closed source software company in disguise? Note: this goes for you all hardware companies that pull this shit (I'm looking at you, ATI, with your buggy closed source user level "driver" libraries. Nvidia is only slightly better because their drivers don't crash on a switch between X and console).
Really? And how, exactly, would you generalize their contribution to modern computing? Please, enlighten us, for all the evidence I have seen has pointed precisely to Microsoft being nothing more than thieves and marketers.
Huh. When I saw FOS I thought "Full Of Shit". Then I read the summary, and wondered why Democrats, who are largely in favor of freedom of speech, would be opposed to this bill. Then I read the article, and I realized that not only was my first thought correct (this bill is full of shit), but that indeed it could apply to the article summary as well. I guess balancing things out means we have to post lies from the other side every once in a while. Only problem is, what if you're not on either side and just interested in truth?
I'll grant you that the real problem is with the RIAA/MPAA, and that lawyers can be viewed as only tools and there are good and bad uses they can be put to. But think about that for a moment: are you really arguing that lawyers (including yourself) are only tools? Are you a tool?
Granted, like I said before, the problem isn't lawyers, and not all lawyers are bad. But they can make choices. And they can refuse to work for a client, no matter how good the money. Others have put it better, but basically these lawyers working for the RIAA and MPAA are sacrificing our long term freedoms to make a little extra cash.
And just to quickly refute your other arguments and passing of the buck: I vote, I've never voted for these incumbent scumbags, I write my representives on an almost weekly basis, I give very little money to the RIAA/MPAA, and I pay my taxes, but unless you are willing to defend me pro bono for not paying taxes, I'm afraid I'm not willing to go to jail for this cause.
No. I'm a big fan of personal responsibility and believe that everyone has a choice (even when that choice is one in which doing the right thing gets you killed). However, it seems highly appropriate that one form of DRM is being used to subvert another. It seems to me that if "The Warden" is not DRM (or doesn't incorporate it) then it is only about one small step away from being such, and definitely is objectionable on the same basis. Hmm, software subverting software? Where have I seen this before? That's right, it was spyware removing other spyware. It was only a matter of time before the companies caught on. The only difference between sociopathic scum and companies is that companies aren't as smart and don't catch on as quickly.
Hey, wow, that sounds really neat! I could of sworn I've heard about something else like this before, though. I think it was called "open sores" or something like that. Some kid from Bork-a-Bisk-a-Bork land was working on some game called "Lunix", only he not only used IRC but this thing call Ooozenet, I think. Wonder if these #winprog guys have ever heard about any of that?
(To the sarcastically impaired, no I don't want to hear your replies, corrections or criticisms. TWAJS, and I was only trying to point out that this is nothing new, only the Windows dweebs think they invented it).
Hey, good for you, doesn't change a thing.
Um, you mean like LISP?
Does that make it any less valid? Besides, I think he may have just been clarifying the following:
So I guess the phrase "a government of the people, by the people and for the people" means nothing to you? WTF is wrong with this country when the government is held to be a higher, "special", separate class from the governed? WTF happened to free speech?
I've seen this bullshit excuse for ads far too many times. Here's a thought: maybe the people selling advertising space realize that their content isn't valuable enough for people to pay for, so they suckered the advertisers into subsidizing them. Not that I'm not blaming advertisers, but the problem is at least partly caused by the so-called "content creators" who are being subsidized by them. I mean, honestly, would you pay for slashdot if you had to? Would you pay to watch sitcoms if that was the only way you could watch them? I wouldn't.
Christopher Locke puts it so much better than I can, but basically, they're my eyes, and I didn't sell them to you. I've already payed for my Internet connection and I'm not going to waste my time on one more soul-destroying, time-wasting piece of trash that has no purpose other than to steal my money, which I have earned with time from my life I will never get back. Ads steal my life, and they don't give anything in return.
That being said, I'm sure the vikings might have something to say about killing people in America before the 1600s.
Then maybe these non-developer-users should put up or shut up, ie pay for what they want or build it themselves (become true open source users).
Maybe some of us don't give a fuck whether Linux is to "make headway on the Desktop". And maybe some of us think this "gimme, gimme, gimme" attitude of useless lusers needs to go. I mean, who the fuck do you think you are telling these people who DONATED their hard work to you what they should do. I can understand constructive criticism, but this entitlement complex is part of the reason the US is heading down the path that Rome did.
You're not the only one. I've hated macs for a long time now, although not purely on their software alone. I think if it wasn't for all the mac zealots out there, I would probably think macos okay, but the batshit mac users drive me up the walls. For all the "advice" the mac users want to give us Linux folk on how to improve and draw more users, you'd think they'd take some of their own and not drive people away by being shallow screaming morons.
Linux developers ARE the users. See, I've been thinking about this whole dichotomy that some people seem to want to enforce on the world by categorizing everything and putting people in their place (so to speak). For example:
Open source doesn't work like that. In open source, the users are the developers and the developers are the users. There's no difference. Wouldn't it be nice if the rest of the world was like that? Wouldn't it be nice if people took on not only their Rights but also their Responsibilities? Wouldn't it be nice if there was true equality and egalitarianism and people weren't segregated into consumers and producers?
Maybe I'm just a dreamer, but I refuse to be categorized, and I refuse to be forced to live the way you choose to live. And yes, that includes ignoring your whining about what "rights" you have as a user and why open source citizens (developer-users) should kowtow to you.
Can I go back and live in that time? I think I'd like it better there. Sure, I'd probably miss the Internet and all, but I'd probably also have better job prospects.
'more efficiently' => 'patents go through even faster and cheaper, now with less review!'
'less prone to litigation' => 'no one can sue over ridiculous patents anymore'.
Maybe I'm just a pessimist; I can only hope I'm not a realist; does that make me an optimist?
Right. That's what they said about Microsoft versus Linux.
Snottiness aside, believe it or not, there are some who will not switch away from Linux. Just as there are those who have worked with Solaris for too long and "trust" Sun, there are those who have worked with Linux for too long and trust it. Not only that, but there is always the last important deciding factor for me: is it Free as in Freedom? Linux is. Solaris ain't.