It's not so much shareholder demands as it is customer demands. Companies wouldn't be under so much pressure to charge less if customers weren't so stingy with their dollars.
While its true that it helps to 'flatten the world' into a large community, it harms our own communities when we outsource.
Err, and why is your community so sacred? You're probably very well off in the general scheme of things. When jobs get outsourced, that helps to create more wealth. As people get wealthier, they can afford more interesting things, like stuff YOU make, like clean air and water, like stuff that hasn't been invented yet.
There are two kinds of faith: faith in things which cannot be disproven, and faith in things which have been disproven. You fail to distinguish between the two. I'm afraid that I'm going to have to take ten points off your grade, which means that you will fail the course. Sorry.
Trust is what makes a modern society function. To destroy a modern society, you destroy trust. In many ways, that has been the aim of the terrorists attacking the US. We trust boarding passes. Pointing out that they are not trustworthy is simply beyond the point. Trust is an ephemeral thing, and yet it is an essential thing. Printing out fake boarding passes to show that they are not trustworthy doesn't help to increase security; in fact..... the terrorists win when you stop trusting people.
You can't infringe copyright if something isn't for sale (if there are no lost sales, there are no monetary damages). If they aren't selling the MP3 for something I have on a CD, then I'm not infringing their copyright if I rip it myself. Period. End of sentence. Thus, it's perfectly possible to have a player full of non-infringing content.
Solaris with the GNU userspace tools is still Solaris. It never becomes GNU/Solaris. Netbsd with the GNU userspace tools is still Netbsd. It never becomes GNU/Netbsd. Linux with the GNU userspace tools is still Linux. It never becomes GNU/Linux.
The problem here is that Stallman has fallen under the sway of Chomsky, who theorizes that people cannot think thoughts they cannot name. This is clearly bullshit, but it explains why RMS is always to careful to name the thought he wants people to think: "Free" and "GNU/Linux".
A flaw in his thinking is to assume that there is a fixed amount of help available. Another flaw is to assume that the laptop actually costs money. If used as an electronic book, then it substitutes for hundreds of dollars worth of books (over the course of its lifetime). Another flaw is to suggest that all expenditures are the same, blurring the difference between spending for investment and spending for consumption.
Hehe, yeah, I noticed that too. I grew up on Long Island, and "upstate" was anything north of Westchester. That's a useless definition for the rest of us who live "upstate". Here, you've got yer Adirondacks, yer Lake Champlain, yer North Country, yer Tug Hill Plateau, yer Central New York, yer Buffalo, yer Rochester, and yer Southern Tier. All of that is "upstate" to what we call "the city" aka "the boat anchor".
The problem wasn't just the price, it was that they didn't want to cut into sales on their more profitable processors, so they didn't sell the PIC into US markets.
Diebold ATMs aren't "secure"; they are merely secure enough that no further investment should be made in them because the losses are cheaper to accept than the cost of the increased security.
The ugly truth of voting is "lots of votes get flushed". The reason we trust our system of voting now is because we have partisan poll watchers who are making sure that the other party doesn't take liberties. In other words, little old ladies. No, all respect due to little old ladies, but do you think they feel confident being in charge of any kind of new technology? If they're wise, they won't be.
If global warming is caused primarily by mankind releasing carbon dioxide into the atmostphere, then it would behoove us to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions to control global warming.
Why? What if the effects of global warming are harmless? What if it's much cheaper to deal with global warming than to stop it?
The problem that I see with environmentalists is that they think the world should not change from when they were a child. As such, they're the ultimate conservatives: they want to conserve everything.
I really wish that someone would clearly list what they intend to do.
It's not in their interest to do that, because they'll lose the votes of everyone who hates that. They want to be as ambiguous as possible so that nobody can find a reason to vote against them.
What is the issue is is this a natural process, a man-made process or a combination?
Why is that the issue? Are we looking to assign blame? Or should we be more interested in what to do about it? Cheaper to reduce it or cheaper to deal with the results? Or should we just ask more rhetorical questions? Anybody know for sure?
Slashdot Mirror
It's not so much shareholder demands as it is customer demands. Companies wouldn't be under so much pressure to charge less if customers weren't so stingy with their dollars.
Flamebait? No, it's just good economics expressed concisely and without regard for the feelings of the bleeding heart leftists.
While its true that it helps to 'flatten the world' into a large community, it harms our own communities when we outsource.
Err, and why is your community so sacred? You're probably very well off in the general scheme of things. When jobs get outsourced, that helps to create more wealth. As people get wealthier, they can afford more interesting things, like stuff YOU make, like clean air and water, like stuff that hasn't been invented yet.
Pay peanuts, get monkeys.
Errrr, no, that's "Pay bananas, get monkeys." If you pay peanuts, you get elephants.
There are two kinds of faith: faith in things which cannot be disproven, and faith in things which have been disproven. You fail to distinguish between the two. I'm afraid that I'm going to have to take ten points off your grade, which means that you will fail the course. Sorry.
This is a great story! Let's see it posted three times to slashdot! Everybody submit the story from a different angle!
If you don't mind a $20,000 deductible per family, their health insurance is quite reasonably priced. Just don't expect it to pay for owies.
Trust is what makes a modern society function. To destroy a modern society, you destroy trust. In many ways, that has been the aim of the terrorists attacking the US. We trust boarding passes. Pointing out that they are not trustworthy is simply beyond the point. Trust is an ephemeral thing, and yet it is an essential thing. Printing out fake boarding passes to show that they are not trustworthy doesn't help to increase security; in fact ..... the terrorists win when you stop trusting people.
You can't infringe copyright if something isn't for sale (if there are no lost sales, there are no monetary damages). If they aren't selling the MP3 for something I have on a CD, then I'm not infringing their copyright if I rip it myself. Period. End of sentence. Thus, it's perfectly possible to have a player full of non-infringing content.
Solaris with the GNU userspace tools is still Solaris. It never becomes GNU/Solaris.
Netbsd with the GNU userspace tools is still Netbsd. It never becomes GNU/Netbsd.
Linux with the GNU userspace tools is still Linux. It never becomes GNU/Linux.
The problem here is that Stallman has fallen under the sway of Chomsky, who theorizes that people cannot think thoughts they cannot name. This is clearly bullshit, but it explains why RMS is always to careful to name the thought he wants people to think: "Free" and "GNU/Linux".
Why do I detect the feeling of salt poured into an open wound?
"Climate change" is about science. "Global warming" is about a political agenda which is indifferent to the science.
Someday poeple will stop using weasel words
Maybe!
A flaw in his thinking is to assume that there is a fixed amount of help available. Another flaw is to assume that the laptop actually costs money. If used as an electronic book, then it substitutes for hundreds of dollars worth of books (over the course of its lifetime). Another flaw is to suggest that all expenditures are the same, blurring the difference between spending for investment and spending for consumption.
Solaris is an OS. The Solaris kernel is a kernel.
SysV is an OS. The SysV kernel is a kernel.
Linux is an OS. The Linux kernel is a kernel.
Got it straight now? Or did you drink the GNU/Linux Fool-Aid(tm)?
Ahhhhh, so Microsoft owns IP that's in Linux, eh? So that explains why they paid Novell All That Much Money.
Hehe, yeah, I noticed that too. I grew up on Long Island, and "upstate" was anything north of Westchester. That's a useless definition for the rest of us who live "upstate". Here, you've got yer Adirondacks, yer Lake Champlain, yer North Country, yer Tug Hill Plateau, yer Central New York, yer Buffalo, yer Rochester, and yer Southern Tier. All of that is "upstate" to what we call "the city" aka "the boat anchor".
The problem wasn't just the price, it was that they didn't want to cut into sales on their more profitable processors, so they didn't sell the PIC into US markets.
Since I'm not buying a Zune, I don't care where Microsoft sends its money.
Diebold ATMs aren't "secure"; they are merely secure enough that no further investment should be made in them because the losses are cheaper to accept than the cost of the increased security.
The ugly truth of voting is "lots of votes get flushed". The reason we trust our system of voting now is because we have partisan poll watchers who are making sure that the other party doesn't take liberties. In other words, little old ladies. No, all respect due to little old ladies, but do you think they feel confident being in charge of any kind of new technology? If they're wise, they won't be.
If global warming is caused primarily by mankind releasing carbon dioxide into the atmostphere, then it would behoove us to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions to control global warming.
Why? What if the effects of global warming are harmless? What if it's much cheaper to deal with global warming than to stop it?
The problem that I see with environmentalists is that they think the world should not change from when they were a child. As such, they're the ultimate conservatives: they want to conserve everything.
I believe that Republicans vote Republican and Democrats vote Democrat
Right. Those voters are not up for grabs. It's everyone else.
the best motivator was to get you pissed off enough at the other guy that you would make the time to get into the polls.
Exactly. "Vote for the R (or D) because otherwise that slimy bastard will get elected." That's the problem with two-party elections.
I really wish that someone would clearly list what they intend to do.
It's not in their interest to do that, because they'll lose the votes of everyone who hates that. They want to be as ambiguous as possible so that nobody can find a reason to vote against them.
The last really big dip in temperature happened just after the Black Death when approx. one third of humanity died.
What did they call the Black Death in China, India, and Africa?
What is the issue is is this a natural process, a man-made process or a combination?
Why is that the issue? Are we looking to assign blame? Or should we be more interested in what to do about it? Cheaper to reduce it or cheaper to deal with the results? Or should we just ask more rhetorical questions? Anybody know for sure?