The US Constitution protects us from Tyrannical Governments, not companies.
If your comment was true,/. would have been taken down years ago for their tyrannical moderating and lack of free-speech or the promotion of "differing views" concerning Microsoft.
We all know why people use that "abortion-of-Frankenstein" of an OS called Linux, and other such products:
1) It's CHEAP. 2) You can d/l it from the Internet. 3) It's CHEAP. 4) You get to build and install it and re-build and re-install it as a time-wasting exercise on all your servers at your |337 j0b as a web-bottom/slave so you don't have to do any REAL work. 5) You appear to be |337 because you have purdy GUIs for 20-year-old UNIX programs 5) It's Cheap 6) You insanely think that it's some kind of fscking babe-magnet to tell them that you're a Webmaster/geek and make $120,000 a year for doing nothing but playing games and #4 in this list all day long - and all you get out of this one is a chick-geek (but, you *might* get laid!) 7) You have a penguin fetish 8) You have a "thing" for Linus Torvalds (wait, isn't that #7?) 9) The only thing |337 about you is that your SAT scores equal the number of pr0n sites you visit on a daily basis and are able to get to the "member/perverts-only" areas either by using your own credit card info or have hacked their servers 10) BTW - did we already mention that "IT'S CHEAP"?
LINUX - "Linus, I Now Understand Xenophobia"
P.S. Cheap-shots are no longer the providence of Linux-o-philes.
If we took only 1% of the money that governments / business spend on MS licenses and used that to fund open source software, we could offer a viable replacement to MS in 1 year.
And how do you propose to do this?
1) Most open-source programmers are still in school/college and probably don't have enough $$$ to contribute. The others don't get paid for working on "free software"
2) Charging equivalent prices for Linux distros would break GNU GPL licensing, as well as other licenses.
3) Corporate donations are a good idea, but who in their right mind would donate money to a software project managed and run by those in #1.
In otherwords "Whaddya want for Nuthin'?????"
"Rrrrrrrrubba Biscuit!"
How unimaginably STUPID are the people that come up with these ideas?!??! This is "grasping-at-straws" to it's nth-degree!!!
What is the demographic of WalMart shoppers?
1.) VCR has been blinking "12:00" since 1984
2.) Uses CD-ROM drive tray on their E-Machines PC for coffee-cup holder
3.) Thinks "Sha-na-na" is still pretty swell
4.) Doesn't use any of the buttons on their Remote Control beyond "Ch. UP", "Ch DN", "Vol. UP" and "Vol. DN" because they can't make sense of it
5.) Believes that when you change the channel on the TV, it will change the channel that you're recording on the VCR.
6.) Actually believes that Al Gore invented the Internet
7.) Never heard of "LINUX" until their geek-nephew/grandson/neighbor's son tried to install it on their dusty 486sx, which caused them to trash that machine and buy the E-Machines PC with the nice coffee-cup tray
8.) Is actually afraid of getting the "Happy Times" virus on their PC
9.) Voted for Dewey instead of Truman
10.) Voted for Barry Goldwater
You think Ma` & Pa` Kettle are going to be able to successfully run a Linux system??!?!?
If you do, I have some lovely property in Florida I'd love to sell you!
WAKE THE HELL UP, YOU STUPID, IGNORANT LINUX-O-PHILES!!! THE AVERAGE PC USER WILL TOSS THEIR PC IN THE GARBAGE IF THEY TRY TO INSTALL LINUX!!!
"Liberty in the USA is fucked if this is how much people care for it, if it boils down to "only the liberties I agree with".
Just because the Free Speech provisions in the 1st Ammendment *don't* have provisions against violent speech doesn't imply that there SHOULDN'T be - that's why we have the ability to Ammend the Constitution, to more clearly define those rights.
You and others here seem to be under a severe misconception of what the words "Freedom" and "Liberty" apply to in relation to a society.
"Freedom" does NOT mean that you can do whatever the hell you want, without suffering any consequences of your actions, and no one can do anything about it. That is Anarchy.
"Liberty" does NOT mean that you can do whatever the hell you want without some leader or official of the law enforcing any laws upon your person. That is Lawlessness.
"Freedom", as in connection with a society, means "to be free from oppressive regimes or governments that do not have the best interest of the populace".
"Liberty", as in connection with a society, means "to be free from oppresive laws and legislation that prohibits or restricts Freedom"
Thankfully, we who post on here from America live in a nation AND a society where we have "Freedom" and "Liberty", and also have the right to PEACEFULLY protest, and have the right to vote and elect persons to Government whom we feel will best serve our nation's needs and best fit with our own ideology and beliefs. What we DO NOT have the right to do is to propose to or incite persons to cause or attempt a VIOLENT OVERTHROW of the Government as Sherman Austin proposes, because such action would violate portions of the Declaration of Independence that support the rights to "..Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"
Dr. King would cry aloud if he saw the kind of "protests" that happen today - they are as distant from the peacefull protests he tried to bring about (which were unfortunately turned to violent protests by racial bigotry) as Democracy is from Anarchy. Today, it's the protestors who are the violent ones, vandalizing property, attacking Law Enforcement officers who are literally shoved into the position of retaliation against violent protestors and then LYING to the media in saying that "the Police started it!!"
End-runs around the highest law in the land are the tactics of scumbags.
Based on your obvious expert opinion on the Constitution, Sherman Austin should be included in that list of "scumbags" by hiding behind the 1st Ammendment. Personally, I'd love to see his punk-ass do "hard-time" in some place like Attica and become some smelly Bubba's new girlfriend.
"Freedom of Speech ceases to be free once that speech infringes on the rights of others"
I hate to burst your bubble, but the 1st Ammendment is *not* an absolute.
It's so sad that this site and this article/thread in particular is so tainted with those who actuall SUPPORT this snot-nosed brat, that people can't see the truth of all of this:
1.) His web site advocated the VIOLENT OVERTHROW of the US Government
2.) He admitted to defacing pro-government web sites to get his message of VIOLENT OVERTHROW
3.) His web site contained BOMB-MAKING instructions to aid in that VIOLENT OVERTHROW of the US Government.
This whole article and discussion-thread just goes to show that the posters on this site have turned Slashdot into nothing but a fscking cespool of liberalism & communism. I hope you're reading this, CmdrTaco - because Slashdot just plain SUCKS now.
agitation =! Defacing Web Sites and breaking Federal Laws
Remember that Thomas Jefferson's quote was relevant for that time. There was no Government "...of the people, for the people and by the people", so a revolt against the British Monarchy and oppressive rule was necessarry; however, some people today call anti-drug legislation as "oppressive", which I'll never understand.
If I had Mr. Peabody's "Way-Back" Machine, I'd go back to the 60's and trash it. I'd throw all of the "counter-culture" morons in jail, throw the whole Black Panther movement in jail, and get rid of Segregation and Communism in one fell-swoop. The 60's is what fscked this country up in the first place.
Moreover, there is a difference between "watching" a suspicious person before he does something wrong, and arresting him, holding him incommunicado for 4 days, and detaining him for an additional 10 days before you realize that you don't have any real evidence against him, and of course keeping his car and wallet.
Excuse me? You're talking pure, unmitigated bovine fertilizer! He ADMITTED to the web site defacements, and THAT, my frined is strong evidence in court. Additionally, if he had any further information at his home, that can be used as evidence to denote intent - and if you knew one bit about jurisprudence and the laws of evidence, "intent" is a HUGE piece of evidence for conviction.
If you are a protester that got gassed, you DESERVED IT, because the Police only use tear-gas when crowds get out-of-control and start VANDALIZING OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY AND ATTACKING OTHER PEOPLE!!!. If the Police in Seattle had "taken-it" to the Mardi Gras crowds that got out-of-control, there would be one young man still alive - but, due to mob-mentality when such events get out-of-control, he's now in the grave.
"Young and Stupid"? Looks like this screwed-up punk was anything but stupid.
A quote from the NewsBytes article:
"In the interview, Austin acknowledged that he vandalized the Web sites and that he knew it was illegal to do so. But he defended the act by saying it was necessary to get his message out."
So much for anyone's "ignorance of the law..." tactic.
I'd say, since he's 18...send the snot-nosed brat to Attica - they'll love him there!
~1989: Sun has this neat little box called the i386 - it ran OpenView and had the ability to run x86 programs like Excel, Word, etc. McNealy approached Gates to have him release the Windows API (in it's entirety) as open-source (yes, the Open-Source War has been going on for THAT long) in order to provide more compatability for the i386, and Gates flatly says "NO". McNealy is pissed, complains to all of the trade magazines and practically vows to get back at Gates & Microsoft for the snubbing.
~1991: Larry Ellison is trying to capture the Server Database market with Oracle 6.2, and is doing just that. Microsoft reveals Windows NT at the Microsoft Professional Developers Conference (PDC) in August 1991, and it's ability to run a "future" SQL Server being developed by Microsoft as well. Ellison is "piqued" at Microsoft's attempt to enter a market that Oracle had, at that time, pretty much sown-up.
~1995: MSN is about to launch, and Gates "discovers" that the Internet is a much bigger thing than he previously supposed (DOH!). MSN decides to expand it's yet-to-be-turned-up Online Service to include Internet Access, but they don't have a browser of their own. MS decides on licensing code from Spyglass for ther "Internet Explorer" instead of going with Netscape's browser. Marc Andreessen is upset that Microsoft is releasing their own browser, and for FREE. Up to the point before IE 4.0 is released, Netscape's browser leads the industry and is superior to IE in most aspects. When IE 4.0 is released, the popularity of IE eclipses Netscape's Navigator, and is vastly more stable than Navigator.
Basically, this is what is know as "Revenge"
So, Netscape/AOL, Oracle and Sun hired the United States Department of Justice as their own lawyers/law firm to file a lawsuit against Microsoft that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with "Fairness in competition" or "Monopolistic Business Practices", regardless of what the lawyers or the media tell you - although it is agreed that Microsoft can be identified as a "monopoly"; it has everything to do with REVENGE!
Be carefull whom you throw out of the sandbox - they might come back to file suit against you for "non-inclusive activities"
>> Microsoft is NOT doing anything illegal when it spends money on political contributions. It is the politicians that are doing
>> something illegal if they let that money sway their votes.
>Hmm. And do you also argue that it's not rape if a woman wears a tight sweater & a short skirt? (After all, if she was dressed that way, she *must* have been asking for it.)
>Only someone truly arrogant & so monomoniacally focussed on success at any cost would accept this argument in defense of an unethical action.
>Geoff
Wow! How amazingly ignorant of you, to equate Political Contributions with RAPE!
Now, we all agree that your commentary about "what constitutes Rape" is accurate - but what if the same woman came-on to a man, or wore her sweater open to the navel or hiked her skirt up to her rib-cage? That's called "inticement".
(great - now I have to go take a cold shower!!)
I'd have to say that YOU, llywrch, are the arrogant one here, to try to equate Political Contributions (which are all legal) with a violent act like Rape.
Oh, like it's OK to hire the DOJ as your own attorney to sue your competition?
GET FSCKING REAL!!!
I wonder what would happen if someone decided to file a lawsuit against Sun & Scott McNealy, AOL & "whomever-the-CEO-flavor-of-the-month" is there, and Larry "Use my Government-issued ID, managed (of course) by Oracle Servers" Ellison for "Miscarriage of Justice" or "Illegal Business Practices in the hiring of the US Dept. of Justice as their personal law firm"?
Using that word just advises the world that you are of such intelligence and cognitive skills, and have such a wonderful grasp of the English Language that you have to resort to "trash-speak".
Using language like that only denigrates one's self; however, using "fsck" instead of that word is acceptable, because it shows that someone has a little imagination .
General Mills pays more money for premium (eye-level) shelf-space at *every* grocery store in America, and they do it so people will by General Mills cereal instead of Post. Campbell's Soup does the same so people will buy their soup over Andersons (which, IMHO is a vastly superior soup) or Western Family. It's called "Business"
Go to school and learn about something we humans call "Economics"
Here we have the "altruistic, gregarious" Open Source community, and software developers like VA/Linux who were funded by banks & groups like CSFB, caught virtually "flagrante delicto" in corruption and scandal.
What makes me laugh even harder is the very thought that the linux-o-philes out there get to taste the "corruption" blame-game that they've been instigating against their eternal adversaries at 1 Microsoft Way in Redmond for years and years!
Gee, I wonder if the Linux-o-philes out there will whitewash VA/Linux's (as well as other "Open Source" product companies) involvement in these financial shenanigans, or come to the realization that their so-called altruistic software purveyors are just as much a bunch of stinking, corrupt money-grubbers/bottom-feeders as the rest of the "business world".
As a contractor, I was a member of the Kernel, API and Test (KAPT) group on the NT Development Team as a Software Tester, as well as a Software Test Engineer for MSN 1.0, and I *know* from first-hand experience that the above poster has BOVINE FECES for his grey matter!
Software bugs are assigned severity levels, depending on how much of a problem the bug is, whether it causes crashes or fatal errors, or if the bug is just a UI-style bug. The only bugs that software companies are concerned about are "showstoppers" or "Severity-1" level bugs - once those bugs are fixed or handled, they move down the list to the next level, and so on. As soon as the product is "Feature-Set Complete", and there are no "showstopper" bugs, and the bugs down to the "UI-Style" bugs are handled, the software is "Code Complete" and ready to be RTM'ed as "Golden"
There has never been a totally bug-free program ever written in the entire history of Data Processing; however, that depends on what you would call a "bug".
I'll venture to say that the above poster spends way too much time in alt.conspiracy.
Wow - if dollargonzo's command of the english language is any indication of the average linux-o-phile's IQ here on/., then I'd suggest that they go over to http://www.lego.com for their entertainment - it's approximately their mental age-level.
Lineo's response to Microsoft's comments on Embedded Linux seems to spew less FUD than Microsoft in this issue, but Lineo appears to be taking cues from Seattle Seahawks RB Ricky Watters - dodge, fake and run with the ball!
For example, in Lineo's response we read:
MS:Networking support in embedded Linux simply is not as comprehensive and feature-rich as that in Windows. Linux does not offer..."
LN:Lineo: The Microsoft author should review the state of the current Linux 2.4 kernel. Linux grew up on the Internet. Its support for networking services is comprehensive. Due to the open source nature of Linux, elements that may not yet be supported can be added by any competent engineer. Just because Red Hat doesn't support a driver doesn't mean it isn't there and usable. This has more to do with Red Hat test bandwidth than Linux maturity. They are picking nits here."
Looks like Lineo is so onanistic about Linux that they're leaving out or conveniently forgetting that 802.11b is a standard that most handheld/palmtop systems - which both of these embedded OS's are targets of - will be a requirement for most users of such devices.
In the section about "Localization", Lineo responds in a fairly arrogant tone:
MS:Multilanguage availability in Linux is extremely limited for both OS localization and application development. Localizing the OS means rebuilding it in the desired language.
Lineo: The OS should never be localized in the embedded space. You localize the user interface, not the OS. Even desktop Linux versions don't localize the OS--it's not necessary.
A fairly arrogant supposition at best, if not downright disingenuous.
Even more "NFL-calibre" dodging and weaving in this next one:
MS:To find and fix security flaws, Linux relies heavily on the Open Source community and source access, assuming that the "many eyes" of the Open Source community can equal a more secure OS. Even vendors such as Red Hat cannot guarantee the reliability and security of their OS. Red Hat's Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing states that they may not be able to test their software effectively because independent software programmers, over whom Red Hat has no control, contribute to Open Source programs.
Lineo: SEC filings always contain very alarming risk statements, even when they are unlikely, in the interest of full disclosure to the investment community. The reality of Open Source software and the "many eyes" theory is realized by comparing the track record of security reports for Microsoft OSes and Linux. Microsoft's Windows XP End User License Agreement is a telling report of Microsoft security record.
If the Linux Caliphs didn't mean what they meant in the SEC filing, then why did they put that in there? This is the last-nail-in-the-coffin for Embedded Linux; if the Linuxians who penned the SEC filing info said that, then it's a EXTREMLY telling fact of how reliable they think Linux and E-Linux is.
Another "chalkboard" lesson that any NFL RB would take to heart:
MS:Linux looks to Java as a distributed applications development environment. Java provides only a set of least-common denominator services across different OSes. Java was originally designed to be interpreted, and only gained the ability to compile down to native code after a major retrofit. It fails to take advantage of the unique capabilities of the underlying OS.
Lineo: Translation:.Net is a proprietary solution targeted at only Windows platforms.
Lineo doesn't even address the issue and throws some obscure reference to.Net in a vain attempt to smokescreen the issue. Why? Because MS hit it right-on-the-head. Also, the Lineo response is incredulous, due to the purported work on Linux/*NIX/OpenSource projects to provide services compatabilites to.Net, so that Linux can interoperate with.Net!
And finnaly, the "smoking gun" for OpenSource!
MS:An OEM is required to sort through a potential legal morass of licensing issues around the GPL if it wants to protect its intellectual property rights. This creates extra costs from both a development and legal perspective. An example of this risk can be taken from Nvidia. An Nvidia programmer, in the course of developing a driver for one of its products, used a portion of code from a freely available video driver. The developer failed to realize the code was licensed under the GPL and would therefore require Nvidia to release the source code for its entire driver. Because Nvidia did not want to release the source code to its commercial software, the company incurred substantial costs to develop a new driver that did not contain the GPL code.
Lineo: The open source licenses are often spoken of as a disadvantage but they are truly a strong advantage. What they offer you is a choice: Do you want to use existing, freely available code (and contribute the resultant product back to the community) to quickly produce your driver or application or do you want to program from the ground up--increasing the development cycle, but avoiding the derivative work clauses of the open source licenses? This choice is not offered by a closed operating system such as XP Embedded.
Lineo spins and spews their own brand of FUD here, and the example that MS gives is an actual event that happened. OpenSource and the GPL are great if you're going to tinker and play with an OS on your own system at home, but it's a disaster waiting to happen when you start developing it in the manner that eLinux is being developed.
Additionally, I have a few questions for the Linux/OpenSource mavens here:
1) Will the end-customer be required to do a "build-and-nmake" on their own PDA or other eLinux device when a new rev of the software is released?
2) Who will the end-customer go to for support; the manufacturer of the device, or to some arcane amalgumn of Linux/OpenSource coders who tell the end-user that they'll have to change such-and-such lines in the sourcecode and then re-compile & re-build the OS?
3) What will happen when the end-user wants to make use of 802.11b or the other new "WiFi" connectivity scheme; have drivers made by the manufacturer that are certified by the manufacturer of the OS, or wait until some guy who's spent 7 years on his B.S. degree wakes up from his recouperation from a 36-hour Quake3 Frag-fest at his best friend's appartment to finish the code for the driver...and leaves out a vital piece of init-code for the driver to talk to the device?
As I've always said: Linux *does* have it's place - in Academia, the Hobbyist's desk, a web-server that doesn't need direct interaction with the end-user, or a super-cool Beowolf cluster like the one mentioned here on/. a few days ago (I tried to find the article, but unable to find it) - go to U of Kentucky's KLAT2 cluster; however, Linux and eLinux will not be the OS-of-choice for the average home/business because of the obstacles it must overcome (3rd Party software, compatability issues, support issues)
Yes, it would take an "Anonymous COWARD" to post that. Interestingly, in the infamous "smoking gun" video of Bin-Moron, no mention was made of Palestinians or "The Palestinian Issue". Now, Arafat's lack of REAL action has caused Israel to deem him a "non-effective" person in relation to Palestinians, and Arafat has actually lost control of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority to the same group-think that brought Islamic Extremists/Fanatics/Zealots/Nut-cases to try to take on the World's Largest, most poweful Nation. Sadly, the majority of the brain-washed zealots who hijacked those 4 planes never knew they would DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH because they were not told this was to be a SUICIDE MISSION!!!
On Jerusalem: Jerusalem was build several THOUSAND years ago by JEWS, not Arabs. It is THEIR city. It is ISRAEL's city, not the vagabond, bedhouin Arabs who squatted on it after the blood-lust of the Ottoman Empire killed the last of the Jewish inhabitants. The Palestinians can go settle somewher else, like Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the UAE....pick one. The only true "infidels" are the Palestinians who call for Israel's destruction.
The USA is Pro-Israeli - if you don't like it, stay/get the hell out of the United States of America!!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Stupid putz!
/. would have been taken down years ago for their tyrannical moderating and lack of free-speech or the promotion of "differing views" concerning Microsoft.
The US Constitution protects us from Tyrannical Governments, not companies.
If your comment was true,
LINUX - "Linus, Now I Understand Xenophobia"
I'm sorry - you must be under the impression that /. and CmdrTaco are fair and even-handed.
Fscking Linux-o-philes and Penguin Fetishists.
LINUX - "Linus, Now I Understand Xenophobia"
Cheap fscking geek.
We all know why people use that "abortion-of-Frankenstein" of an OS called Linux, and other such products:
1) It's CHEAP.
2) You can d/l it from the Internet.
3) It's CHEAP.
4) You get to build and install it and re-build and re-install it as a time-wasting exercise on all your servers at your |337 j0b as a web-bottom/slave so you don't have to do any REAL work.
5) You appear to be |337 because you have purdy GUIs for 20-year-old UNIX programs
5) It's Cheap
6) You insanely think that it's some kind of fscking babe-magnet to tell them that you're a Webmaster/geek and make $120,000 a year for doing nothing but playing games and #4 in this list all day long - and all you get out of this one is a chick-geek (but, you *might* get laid!)
7) You have a penguin fetish
8) You have a "thing" for Linus Torvalds (wait, isn't that #7?)
9) The only thing |337 about you is that your SAT scores equal the number of pr0n sites you visit on a daily basis and are able to get to the "member/perverts-only" areas either by using your own credit card info or have hacked their servers
10) BTW - did we already mention that "IT'S CHEAP"?
LINUX - "Linus, I Now Understand Xenophobia"
P.S. Cheap-shots are no longer the providence of Linux-o-philes.
And how do you propose to do this?
1) Most open-source programmers are still in school/college and probably don't have enough $$$ to contribute. The others don't get paid for working on "free software"
2) Charging equivalent prices for Linux distros would break GNU GPL licensing, as well as other licenses.
3) Corporate donations are a good idea, but who in their right mind would donate money to a software project managed and run by those in #1.
In otherwords "Whaddya want for Nuthin'?????" "Rrrrrrrrubba Biscuit!"
How unimaginably STUPID are the people that come up with these ideas?!??! This is "grasping-at-straws" to it's nth-degree!!!
What is the demographic of WalMart shoppers?
1.) VCR has been blinking "12:00" since 1984
2.) Uses CD-ROM drive tray on their E-Machines PC for coffee-cup holder
3.) Thinks "Sha-na-na" is still pretty swell
4.) Doesn't use any of the buttons on their Remote Control beyond "Ch. UP", "Ch DN", "Vol. UP" and "Vol. DN" because they can't make sense of it
5.) Believes that when you change the channel on the TV, it will change the channel that you're recording on the VCR.
6.) Actually believes that Al Gore invented the Internet
7.) Never heard of "LINUX" until their geek-nephew/grandson/neighbor's son tried to install it on their dusty 486sx, which caused them to trash that machine and buy the E-Machines PC with the nice coffee-cup tray
8.) Is actually afraid of getting the "Happy Times" virus on their PC
9.) Voted for Dewey instead of Truman
10.) Voted for Barry Goldwater
You think Ma` & Pa` Kettle are going to be able to successfully run a Linux system??!?!?
If you do, I have some lovely property in Florida I'd love to sell you!
WAKE THE HELL UP, YOU STUPID, IGNORANT LINUX-O-PHILES!!! THE AVERAGE PC USER WILL TOSS THEIR PC IN THE GARBAGE IF THEY TRY TO INSTALL LINUX!!!
LINUX: "Linus, Now I Understand Xenophobia!"
Just because the Free Speech provisions in the 1st Ammendment *don't* have provisions against violent speech doesn't imply that there SHOULDN'T be - that's why we have the ability to Ammend the Constitution, to more clearly define those rights.
You and others here seem to be under a severe misconception of what the words "Freedom" and "Liberty" apply to in relation to a society.
"Freedom" does NOT mean that you can do whatever the hell you want, without suffering any consequences of your actions, and no one can do anything about it. That is Anarchy.
"Liberty" does NOT mean that you can do whatever the hell you want without some leader or official of the law enforcing any laws upon your person. That is Lawlessness.
"Freedom", as in connection with a society, means "to be free from oppressive regimes or governments that do not have the best interest of the populace".
"Liberty", as in connection with a society, means "to be free from oppresive laws and legislation that prohibits or restricts Freedom"
Thankfully, we who post on here from America live in a nation AND a society where we have "Freedom" and "Liberty", and also have the right to PEACEFULLY protest, and have the right to vote and elect persons to Government whom we feel will best serve our nation's needs and best fit with our own ideology and beliefs. What we DO NOT have the right to do is to propose to or incite persons to cause or attempt a VIOLENT OVERTHROW of the Government as Sherman Austin proposes, because such action would violate portions of the Declaration of Independence that support the rights to "..Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"
Dr. King would cry aloud if he saw the kind of "protests" that happen today - they are as distant from the peacefull protests he tried to bring about (which were unfortunately turned to violent protests by racial bigotry) as Democracy is from Anarchy. Today, it's the protestors who are the violent ones, vandalizing property, attacking Law Enforcement officers who are literally shoved into the position of retaliation against violent protestors and then LYING to the media in saying that "the Police started it!!"
I'd say "fsck the Anarchists!"
Based on your obvious expert opinion on the Constitution, Sherman Austin should be included in that list of "scumbags" by hiding behind the 1st Ammendment. Personally, I'd love to see his punk-ass do "hard-time" in some place like Attica and become some smelly Bubba's new girlfriend.
"Freedom of Speech ceases to be free once that speech infringes on the rights of others"
I hate to burst your bubble, but the 1st Ammendment is *not* an absolute.
Have fun!
It's so sad that this site and this article/thread in particular is so tainted with those who actuall SUPPORT this snot-nosed brat, that people can't see the truth of all of this:
1.) His web site advocated the VIOLENT OVERTHROW of the US Government
2.) He admitted to defacing pro-government web sites to get his message of VIOLENT OVERTHROW
3.) His web site contained BOMB-MAKING instructions to aid in that VIOLENT OVERTHROW of the US Government.
This whole article and discussion-thread just goes to show that the posters on this site have turned Slashdot into nothing but a fscking cespool of liberalism & communism. I hope you're reading this, CmdrTaco - because Slashdot just plain SUCKS now.
Tom would take his trusty blunderbuss and put a ball or three through the Tory's skull...and I'd do the same!
To Hell with the Anarchists!
agitation =! Crys to overthrow the Government
agitation =! Defacing Web Sites and breaking Federal Laws
Remember that Thomas Jefferson's quote was relevant for that time. There was no Government "...of the people, for the people and by the people", so a revolt against the British Monarchy and oppressive rule was necessarry; however, some people today call anti-drug legislation as "oppressive", which I'll never understand.
If I had Mr. Peabody's "Way-Back" Machine, I'd go back to the 60's and trash it. I'd throw all of the "counter-culture" morons in jail, throw the whole Black Panther movement in jail, and get rid of Segregation and Communism in one fell-swoop. The 60's is what fscked this country up in the first place.
Excuse me? You're talking pure, unmitigated bovine fertilizer! He ADMITTED to the web site defacements, and THAT, my frined is strong evidence in court. Additionally, if he had any further information at his home, that can be used as evidence to denote intent - and if you knew one bit about jurisprudence and the laws of evidence, "intent" is a HUGE piece of evidence for conviction.
If you are a protester that got gassed, you DESERVED IT, because the Police only use tear-gas when crowds get out-of-control and start VANDALIZING OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY AND ATTACKING OTHER PEOPLE!!!. If the Police in Seattle had "taken-it" to the Mardi Gras crowds that got out-of-control, there would be one young man still alive - but, due to mob-mentality when such events get out-of-control, he's now in the grave.
All I can say is "FSCK the Anarchists"
"Young and Stupid"? Looks like this screwed-up punk was anything but stupid.
A quote from the NewsBytes article:
"In the interview, Austin acknowledged that he vandalized the Web sites and that he knew it was illegal to do so. But he defended the act by saying it was necessary to get his message out."
So much for anyone's "ignorance of the law..." tactic.
I'd say, since he's 18...send the snot-nosed brat to Attica - they'll love him there!
It goes like this:
~1989: Sun has this neat little box called the i386 - it ran OpenView and had the ability to run x86 programs like Excel, Word, etc. McNealy approached Gates to have him release the Windows API (in it's entirety) as open-source (yes, the Open-Source War has been going on for THAT long) in order to provide more compatability for the i386, and Gates flatly says "NO". McNealy is pissed, complains to all of the trade magazines and practically vows to get back at Gates & Microsoft for the snubbing.
~1991: Larry Ellison is trying to capture the Server Database market with Oracle 6.2, and is doing just that. Microsoft reveals Windows NT at the Microsoft Professional Developers Conference (PDC) in August 1991, and it's ability to run a "future" SQL Server being developed by Microsoft as well. Ellison is "piqued" at Microsoft's attempt to enter a market that Oracle had, at that time, pretty much sown-up.
~1995: MSN is about to launch, and Gates "discovers" that the Internet is a much bigger thing than he previously supposed (DOH!). MSN decides to expand it's yet-to-be-turned-up Online Service to include Internet Access, but they don't have a browser of their own. MS decides on licensing code from Spyglass for ther "Internet Explorer" instead of going with Netscape's browser. Marc Andreessen is upset that Microsoft is releasing their own browser, and for FREE. Up to the point before IE 4.0 is released, Netscape's browser leads the industry and is superior to IE in most aspects. When IE 4.0 is released, the popularity of IE eclipses Netscape's Navigator, and is vastly more stable than Navigator.
Basically, this is what is know as "Revenge"
So, Netscape/AOL, Oracle and Sun hired the United States Department of Justice as their own lawyers/law firm to file a lawsuit against Microsoft that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with "Fairness in competition" or "Monopolistic Business Practices", regardless of what the lawyers or the media tell you - although it is agreed that Microsoft can be identified as a "monopoly"; it has everything to do with REVENGE!
Be carefull whom you throw out of the sandbox - they might come back to file suit against you for "non-inclusive activities"
ScottKin
>> Microsoft is NOT doing anything illegal when it spends money on political contributions. It is the politicians that are doing
>> something illegal if they let that money sway their votes.
>Hmm. And do you also argue that it's not rape if a woman wears a tight sweater & a short skirt? (After all, if she was dressed that way, she *must* have been asking for it.)
>Only someone truly arrogant & so monomoniacally focussed on success at any cost would accept this argument in defense of an unethical action.
>Geoff
Wow! How amazingly ignorant of you, to equate Political Contributions with RAPE!
Now, we all agree that your commentary about "what constitutes Rape" is accurate - but what if the same woman came-on to a man, or wore her sweater open to the navel or hiked her skirt up to her rib-cage? That's called "inticement".
(great - now I have to go take a cold shower!!)
I'd have to say that YOU, llywrch, are the arrogant one here, to try to equate Political Contributions (which are all legal) with a violent act like Rape.
Chew on that for a bit!
Oh, like it's OK to hire the DOJ as your own attorney to sue your competition?
GET FSCKING REAL!!!
I wonder what would happen if someone decided to file a lawsuit against Sun & Scott McNealy, AOL & "whomever-the-CEO-flavor-of-the-month" is there, and Larry "Use my Government-issued ID, managed (of course) by Oracle Servers" Ellison for "Miscarriage of Justice" or "Illegal Business Practices in the hiring of the US Dept. of Justice as their personal law firm"?
Using that word just advises the world that you are of such intelligence and cognitive skills, and have such a wonderful grasp of the English Language that you have to resort to "trash-speak".
Using language like that only denigrates one's self; however, using "fsck" instead of that word is acceptable, because it shows that someone has a little imagination .
Maybe some of us who post here WANT it to be known who they are, and want their opinions associated with their name...
Maybe some of us have opinions that are well-informed, concise and vastly more realistic...
...but then again, maybe not.
How FSCKing ignorant are you?
General Mills pays more money for premium (eye-level) shelf-space at *every* grocery store in America, and they do it so people will by General Mills cereal instead of Post. Campbell's Soup does the same so people will buy their soup over Andersons (which, IMHO is a vastly superior soup) or Western Family. It's called "Business"
Go to school and learn about something we humans call "Economics"
I think it's abso-freakin-lutely hillarious!
Here we have the "altruistic, gregarious" Open Source community, and software developers like VA/Linux who were funded by banks & groups like CSFB, caught virtually "flagrante delicto" in corruption and scandal.
What makes me laugh even harder is the very thought that the linux-o-philes out there get to taste the "corruption" blame-game that they've been instigating against their eternal adversaries at 1 Microsoft Way in Redmond for years and years!
Welcome to REALITY, People!
Oh, the irony - the hillarious irony!
Linux - "Linux, Now I Understand Xenophobia"
Gee, I wonder if the Linux-o-philes out there will whitewash VA/Linux's (as well as other "Open Source" product companies) involvement in these financial shenanigans, or come to the realization that their so-called altruistic software purveyors are just as much a bunch of stinking, corrupt money-grubbers/bottom-feeders as the rest of the "business world".
Linux - "Linus, I Now Understand Xenophobia!"
Pure, unmitigated BOVINE FECES!!!
As a contractor, I was a member of the Kernel, API and Test (KAPT) group on the NT Development Team as a Software Tester, as well as a Software Test Engineer for MSN 1.0, and I *know* from first-hand experience that the above poster has BOVINE FECES for his grey matter!
Software bugs are assigned severity levels, depending on how much of a problem the bug is, whether it causes crashes or fatal errors, or if the bug is just a UI-style bug. The only bugs that software companies are concerned about are "showstoppers" or "Severity-1" level bugs - once those bugs are fixed or handled, they move down the list to the next level, and so on. As soon as the product is "Feature-Set Complete", and there are no "showstopper" bugs, and the bugs down to the "UI-Style" bugs are handled, the software is "Code Complete" and ready to be RTM'ed as "Golden"
There has never been a totally bug-free program ever written in the entire history of Data Processing; however, that depends on what you would call a "bug".
I'll venture to say that the above poster spends way too much time in alt.conspiracy.
Hey, dollargonzo - RTF English Textbooks!!!
/., then I'd suggest that they go over to http://www.lego.com for their entertainment - it's approximately their mental age-level.
the word is:
"you"
not:
"yuo:
Wow - if dollargonzo's command of the english language is any indication of the average linux-o-phile's IQ here on
For example, in Lineo's response we read:
MS:Networking support in embedded Linux simply is not as comprehensive and feature-rich as that in Windows. Linux does not offer..."
LN:Lineo: The Microsoft author should review the state of the current Linux 2.4 kernel. Linux grew up on the Internet. Its support for networking services is comprehensive. Due to the open source nature of Linux, elements that may not yet be supported can be added by any competent engineer. Just because Red Hat doesn't support a driver doesn't mean it isn't there and usable. This has more to do with Red Hat test bandwidth than Linux maturity. They are picking nits here."
Looks like Lineo is so onanistic about Linux that they're leaving out or conveniently forgetting that 802.11b is a standard that most handheld/palmtop systems - which both of these embedded OS's are targets of - will be a requirement for most users of such devices.
In the section about "Localization", Lineo responds in a fairly arrogant tone:
MS:Multilanguage availability in Linux is extremely limited for both OS localization and application development. Localizing the OS means rebuilding it in the desired language.
Lineo: The OS should never be localized in the embedded space. You localize the user interface, not the OS. Even desktop Linux versions don't localize the OS--it's not necessary.
A fairly arrogant supposition at best, if not downright disingenuous.
Even more "NFL-calibre" dodging and weaving in this next one:
MS:To find and fix security flaws, Linux relies heavily on the Open Source community and source access, assuming that the "many eyes" of the Open Source community can equal a more secure OS. Even vendors such as Red Hat cannot guarantee the reliability and security of their OS. Red Hat's Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing states that they may not be able to test their software effectively because independent software programmers, over whom Red Hat has no control, contribute to Open Source programs.
Lineo: SEC filings always contain very alarming risk statements, even when they are unlikely, in the interest of full disclosure to the investment community. The reality of Open Source software and the "many eyes" theory is realized by comparing the track record of security reports for Microsoft OSes and Linux. Microsoft's Windows XP End User License Agreement is a telling report of Microsoft security record.
If the Linux Caliphs didn't mean what they meant in the SEC filing, then why did they put that in there? This is the last-nail-in-the-coffin for Embedded Linux; if the Linuxians who penned the SEC filing info said that, then it's a EXTREMLY telling fact of how reliable they think Linux and E-Linux is.
Another "chalkboard" lesson that any NFL RB would take to heart:
MS:Linux looks to Java as a distributed applications development environment. Java provides only a set of least-common denominator services across different OSes. Java was originally designed to be interpreted, and only gained the ability to compile down to native code after a major retrofit. It fails to take advantage of the unique capabilities of the underlying OS.
Lineo: Translation: .Net is a proprietary solution targeted at only Windows platforms.
DODGE...FADE...FAKE...RUN...DODGE AGAIN...SPIN...BUMP-n-RUN!
Lineo doesn't even address the issue and throws some obscure reference to .Net in a vain attempt to smokescreen the issue. Why? Because MS hit it right-on-the-head. Also, the Lineo response is incredulous, due to the purported work on Linux/*NIX/OpenSource projects to provide services compatabilites to .Net, so that Linux can interoperate with .Net!
And finnaly, the "smoking gun" for OpenSource!
MS:An OEM is required to sort through a potential legal morass of licensing issues around the GPL if it wants to protect its intellectual property rights. This creates extra costs from both a development and legal perspective. An example of this risk can be taken from Nvidia. An Nvidia programmer, in the course of developing a driver for one of its products, used a portion of code from a freely available video driver. The developer failed to realize the code was licensed under the GPL and would therefore require Nvidia to release the source code for its entire driver. Because Nvidia did not want to release the source code to its commercial software, the company incurred substantial costs to develop a new driver that did not contain the GPL code.
Lineo: The open source licenses are often spoken of as a disadvantage but they are truly a strong advantage. What they offer you is a choice: Do you want to use existing, freely available code (and contribute the resultant product back to the community) to quickly produce your driver or application or do you want to program from the ground up--increasing the development cycle, but avoiding the derivative work clauses of the open source licenses? This choice is not offered by a closed operating system such as XP Embedded.
Lineo spins and spews their own brand of FUD here, and the example that MS gives is an actual event that happened. OpenSource and the GPL are great if you're going to tinker and play with an OS on your own system at home, but it's a disaster waiting to happen when you start developing it in the manner that eLinux is being developed.
Additionally, I have a few questions for the Linux/OpenSource mavens here:
1) Will the end-customer be required to do a "build-and-nmake" on their own PDA or other eLinux device when a new rev of the software is released?
2) Who will the end-customer go to for support; the manufacturer of the device, or to some arcane amalgumn of Linux/OpenSource coders who tell the end-user that they'll have to change such-and-such lines in the sourcecode and then re-compile & re-build the OS?
3) What will happen when the end-user wants to make use of 802.11b or the other new "WiFi" connectivity scheme; have drivers made by the manufacturer that are certified by the manufacturer of the OS, or wait until some guy who's spent 7 years on his B.S. degree wakes up from his recouperation from a 36-hour Quake3 Frag-fest at his best friend's appartment to finish the code for the driver...and leaves out a vital piece of init-code for the driver to talk to the device?
As I've always said: Linux *does* have it's place - in Academia, the Hobbyist's desk, a web-server that doesn't need direct interaction with the end-user, or a super-cool Beowolf cluster like the one mentioned here on /. a few days ago (I tried to find the article, but unable to find it) - go to U of Kentucky's KLAT2 cluster; however, Linux and eLinux will not be the OS-of-choice for the average home/business because of the obstacles it must overcome (3rd Party software, compatability issues, support issues)
Linux="Linus, I Now Understand Xenophobia"
Lockheed Advanced Technical Laboratories Page on the Sea Shadow
Naval Vessel Registry page on the Sea Shadow
Overhead View of Sea Shadow at sea - April 11, 1993, off of Santa Cruz Island, CA
Larger Picture of Sea Shadow
Sea Shadow berthed inside the "Hughes Mining Barge (HMB-1)", which was used to move Sea Shadow to and from it's Sea Trials area
Yes, it would take an "Anonymous COWARD" to post that. Interestingly, in the infamous "smoking gun" video of Bin-Moron, no mention was made of Palestinians or "The Palestinian Issue". Now, Arafat's lack of REAL action has caused Israel to deem him a "non-effective" person in relation to Palestinians, and Arafat has actually lost control of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority to the same group-think that brought Islamic Extremists/Fanatics/Zealots/Nut-cases to try to take on the World's Largest, most poweful Nation. Sadly, the majority of the brain-washed zealots who hijacked those 4 planes never knew they would DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH because they were not told this was to be a SUICIDE MISSION!!!
On Jerusalem: Jerusalem was build several THOUSAND years ago by JEWS, not Arabs. It is THEIR city. It is ISRAEL's city, not the vagabond, bedhouin Arabs who squatted on it after the blood-lust of the Ottoman Empire killed the last of the Jewish inhabitants. The Palestinians can go settle somewher else, like Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the UAE....pick one. The only true "infidels" are the Palestinians who call for Israel's destruction.
The USA is Pro-Israeli - if you don't like it, stay/get the hell out of the United States of America!!!!