You are thinking wrong. Remember this is going to be tried in Utah. Here in a nutshell will be basis for this trial.
1) SCO is a Utah company. 2) The holding company is also based in Utah (and salt lake). 3) Son of Orrin Hatch the beloved senator from Utah will be the lawyer for SCO. 4) Linux is communist software written by hippies.
Now I ask you good mormon members of this jury. Are you going to rule in favor for this fine mormon company or are you going to rule in favor of a bunch of communist hippies?
SCO has this trial locked up. They will win it no matter what the evidence. It's going to be up to the appelate court to really decide this. Trust me no jury in salt lake is going to rule against the local boys.
"But the a large issue with LINUX is that it's hard to get away selling non-open source software on LINUX. "
Is it? Why? Oracle runs on linux, websphere runs on linux, DB/2 runs on linux, just about any major enterprise software be it SAP, Sybase, peoplesoft etc all run on linux. They are also all closed source and are very expensive.
"Developers won't be able to afford to ignore 20% of the users IF LINUX gets there, but they also won't be able to afford to give their software away for free, and donations are just perplexing in logic."
You have the logic wrong. Linux will grow because it's free. As it grows there will be a greater market for software. This will be a positive feedback cycle which will help linux grow even more.
" Bill Clinton came up with the idea of anti-encryption laws, and signed the DMCA into law."
Wow. Bill clinton must be brilliant. He came up with the idea of anti-encryption laws. I am glad George Bush is too stupid to come up with any ideas like that!. Also of course Bill Clinton signed a law without it going trough a republican controlled congress.
Even if I was to buy your inane idea that the DMCA is purely the fault of the democrats you really think that the DMCA is as bad as the patriot act or the TIA program? I suppose you do because the democrats are inherently evil right?
"In regards to economic policy, you provide no evidence what-so-ever. "
I think all of America is glad that the Clinton era of peace prosperity is finally over.
"If a Libertarian runs, I will vote for him."
A liberterian will run. You will not for him/her. You will not write in a candidate of your choice. You will vote for the republican. In the US you can vote for whoever you want, you can vote for yourself or your mom if you want to.
"With regard to Democrat/Republican, party lines are very blurred, and there is basically little difference. "
If there is so little difference then why not vote for the democrat? If you feel obliged to vote for somebody on the ballot and if there is no difference anyway then what do you care? Just vote democrat then you can be honest when you say you don't care.
I bet you won't though. I get the feeling you'd rather die then to vote for a democrat.
If both solutions work and once costs less people will care. The tricky part is to get it to stage where it works well for a reasonable amount of people.
For me I think anything above 20% is just icing on the cake. Once Linux gets 20% desktop penetration the hardware vendors and the boneheaded web designers will not be afford to code just to the microsoft products.
" To try to simplify things beyond reason. Libertarians are really Republicans, because -- according to you -- they prefer Republicans to Democrats, given a choice between the two."
Why yes.
"The USA Patriot act was supported by Democrats too."
The patriot act was born in the republican party and lives in the republican party.
"The reason I'd rather have Bush over his Democrat counterparts is that Bush supports superior economic policy."
LOL. Thanks you made my day with one. I laughed so hard my beer came out of my nose.
"Furthermore, the anti-liberty social policies of Bush -- particularly, anti-choice and anti-gay rights -- are unlikely to go anywhere."
Not True. Bush will elect at least one if not two zealots into the supreme court. This will solidify and already right wing supreme court. Once that happens homosexuality will be illegal as well as abortion. It will also be a huge setback to all kinds of freedoms you thought you had.
" For the most part, when it comes to uniting against both the economic and social liberties of citizens, the Democratic and Republican parties are just two sides of the same coin."
And yet when push comes to shove you will choose a republican. Why not just admit that you are a republican?
When push comes to shove you will vote for a republican. That's what people who call themselves libertarians do. You will do this despite the fact in this case the leasing democrats are more iberterian then bush. They are less interventionists, want to give you more privacy, and less subsidies.
You remember a civil war going on there? You remember the massacres going on there?
"So you are saying that these embargoes were lifted just as the violence against the Kurds and the East Timorese was reaching its climax? "
I am saying there is no cause and effect relationship there. Our relationship with Turkey is complex and long lasting. We have listening posts there, we have military bases there. We have intelligence, army and navy presence there. And we have had them for a long time before and after clinton.
"Right, so making something up is better than reading it somewhere"
reading a lie is no different then making it up.
"And there are plenty of examples where violence and tyranny was stopped. The massacre of the Jews, Roma, Homosexuals, and others, by the Nazis was stopped. Slavery in America was stopped. Violence in Timor was stopped (eventually). EU peace keepers are in the DRC right now trying to stop violence."
None of that took place overnight. None of it took place without a groundswell of public participation. None of it happened because of an american president made it happen. Most of the examples you stated ended through extremely violent events that took tens of thousands of lives. How many people died trying to end slavery? How many died opposing hitler?
You know what? You are a simple minded moron. You are unable to understand the complexities of life. Your brain is unable to process too many facts so you pick the most simple minded answer and grip it in your pea brain with all your might.
Turkey is evil, indonesia is evil, clinton is evil, US invaded yugoslavia and bombed them for fun. You read simple minded sites and believe that their version of reality is the only one. You should travel and maybe learn a couple of languages. At least a few history books or something. You can start anywhere you want. Read about the PKK or the conflict between the serbians and the bosnians.
" To get Defragmenting, disk diagnostics, remote desktop client, tcp stack, the terminal emulator, accesibility and zip utilities you had to upgrade your O.S. This is a purchase"
You know what you already lost the casual reader. You can't compete with the PR power of RIAA. As far as the casual reader is concerned you are a thief.
It's also worth noting that the casual reader can be convinced of anything. Before the war something like 60% of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9-11. After the war the number is still above 40%. If people can be convinced to be loyal to one brand of sugared water over another they can be convinced of anything.
Take your blinds off man. Why are republicans so god damned stupid.
Have you ever heard of the homeland security act? Have you heard of of the dept of homeland security? Yes GW created a whole new dept and a HUGE one at that. He also increased defense spending, imposed tariffs on steel and other products, increased farm subsidies, increased subsidies for logging, reversed clinton and increased subsidies for grazing fees.
Not only has Bush increased the size of the govt, increased govt spending he has also increased govt surveillance, increased intrusive laws, abolished many forms of privacy and continues to fight to make you less free every day.
Too bad political zealots like you are unable to get past bumber sticker slogans like "republicans want less govt" and "republicans want to get the govt off of peoples backs" or "republicans are more fiscally conservative".
The facts point out otherwise. Republicans spend more money then deomocrats, they are less fiscally responsible and they pass even more intrusive laws putting the govt not only on our backs but in our bedrooms and bodies too.
"but I doubt that had anything to do with the US. That was because of his ties to organized crime."
I am not arguing that US had nothing to do with it just that they were not the primary motivators for it. Also your original post said something about an invation which is way out of line.
"So dramatically increasing arm sales to Turkey as the oppression of the Kurds was reaching its zenith is not considered "help"? Here are some non-socialist links. "
Once again you are making the claim that US increased arms sales so that turkey could kill more kurds when that's not the case at all. Arms sales to turkey were increased because an embargo previously placed was lifted. That was all negotiated via the UN and US and was tied to liberilization of Turkish policies. As for the PKK they are recognized as a terrorist organization by the UN, the US and Turkey. You are spinning the story to make it one sided.
"The Clinton administration increased weapons sales to Indonesia as the oppression and murder of the East Timorese peaked."
See above.
"Do you have a source to verify that?"
The oil for food program was initiated by clinton. Clinton also looked away when Iraq resumed oil sales to sryia and turkey and traded heavily with turkey, syria and iran.
"You may not like socialist sources, but that's better than having no source at all."
No it's not.
"To try to save peoples lives."
People are dying all over the world. People die all over the world under all presidents. You seem to think that it's all Bill Clinton's fault which shows how stupid you are. People died all over the world before Bill Clinton was born, before he was the president, and after presidency. You are critizing Bill Clinton because he failed to stop death and tyranny. Well guess what nobody can. Nobody has, nobody will.
Martha Stewar is a well known democrat. Kenneth Lay is a well known republican.
Martha Stewart avoided losing about 40 grand through allegedly shady dealings. Kenneth lay stole billions of dollars from Enron employees and shareholders.
Martha Steward is going to be tried. Kenneth Lay is scott free and will never be tried for anything.
This justice dept is the most politically motived one ever. Only democrats go to jail (that and arabs of course)
Hunter S thompson once said that an election was like a tree dropping it's leaves and getting new ones. Same damned tree and the new leaves are exactly like the old ones.
" Well there's the obvious invasion of Yugoslavia and installing a US friendly leader who dissolved the country into Serbia and Montenegro, and was then promptly assassinated."
Now that's what I call spin!. Bravo!.
"But there's also the enforcing of murderous sanctions that were, up until the second Iraq invasion a few months ago, killing 5000 children each month (UN and WHO numbers). "
The sanctions were immorall, hideous and downright evil. Clinton did not initiate them. Although he did not lift them either he did ease them up a bit.
"And the bombings in the illegally enforced no-fly zones which included the bombing and killing of dangerous and deadly sheep."
Also illegal, immoral and evil. Also unfortunately a policy he inherited. He should have stopped it but it's worth noting that the bombings increased markedly as soon as Bush took over.
"Of course there's also helping turkey massacre 30,000 kurds. "
Bill Clinton did not "help turkey". That's just a plain old lie. The Turks have been plagued with kurdish terrorism for years. This too is a long standing issue that has been going on for decades. Kurds routinely exploded bombs in crowded cities like Istanbul, burned forests, kidnapped and killed civillians. This is not nearly one sided as you present it. Finally I would not take the word of a socialist party web site as the absolute word on any issue let alone this one.
"Giving the draconian and terrorist government of Colombia billions in military aid."
Mostly to fight drugs. Again I disagree with the policy but he inherited that one too.
" Increasing weapons sales to Indonesia and trying to cover for them, and delay the UN in acting to stop the massacre in East Timor."
Please don't mention East Timor without also mentioning Kissinger, perhaps the most evil war criminal of all time.
Really the things you mention are simply leaving in place policies he inherited. There would have been massive opposition to changing any of them given a republican congress. Could you imagine if CLinton tried to stop the sanctions or stopped money to columbia? It would have been a stupid fight to get into and he would have lost anyway. Why waste political clout when you know you are going to lose?
Slashdot Mirror
You are thinking wrong. Remember this is going to be tried in Utah. Here in a nutshell will be basis for this trial.
1) SCO is a Utah company.
2) The holding company is also based in Utah (and salt lake).
3) Son of Orrin Hatch the beloved senator from Utah will be the lawyer for SCO.
4) Linux is communist software written by hippies.
Now I ask you good mormon members of this jury. Are you going to rule in favor for this fine mormon company or are you going to rule in favor of a bunch of communist hippies?
SCO has this trial locked up. They will win it no matter what the evidence. It's going to be up to the appelate court to really decide this. Trust me no jury in salt lake is going to rule against the local boys.
Once again.
You have never voted for a democrat, you have often voted for republicans, you have sometimes voted for liberterians.
That makes you a republican.
There is no shame in admitting it.
" That's interesting that the UN would pick up LINUX support."
Yes. Especially considering there has not been a public election yet.
Free as in freedom should include elections don't you think?
"Let me be clear. I am not a Democrat or a Republican. Period. End of discussion."
Have you ever voted for a democrat?
I thought not.
Have you voted for a republican?
I thought so.
Have you voted republican more often then liberterian?
I thought so.
Just admit it man. You are republican. I admit I am a democrat. There is no shame in it.
" 20% isn't so easy to do"
No it's not but neither is it impossible.
"But the a large issue with LINUX is that it's hard to get away selling non-open source software on LINUX. "
Is it? Why? Oracle runs on linux, websphere runs on linux, DB/2 runs on linux, just about any major enterprise software be it SAP, Sybase, peoplesoft etc all run on linux. They are also all closed source and are very expensive.
"Developers won't be able to afford to ignore 20% of the users IF LINUX gets there, but they also won't be able to afford to give their software away for free, and donations are just perplexing in logic."
You have the logic wrong. Linux will grow because it's free. As it grows there will be a greater market for software. This will be a positive feedback cycle which will help linux grow even more.
" Bill Clinton came up with the idea of anti-encryption laws, and signed the DMCA into law."
Wow. Bill clinton must be brilliant. He came up with the idea of anti-encryption laws. I am glad George Bush is too stupid to come up with any ideas like that!. Also of course Bill Clinton signed a law without it going trough a republican controlled congress.
Even if I was to buy your inane idea that the DMCA is purely the fault of the democrats you really think that the DMCA is as bad as the patriot act or the TIA program? I suppose you do because the democrats are inherently evil right?
"In regards to economic policy, you provide no evidence what-so-ever. "
I think all of America is glad that the Clinton era of peace prosperity is finally over.
"If a Libertarian runs, I will vote for him."
A liberterian will run. You will not for him/her. You will not write in a candidate of your choice. You will vote for the republican. In the US you can vote for whoever you want, you can vote for yourself or your mom if you want to.
"With regard to Democrat/Republican, party lines are very blurred, and there is basically little difference. "
If there is so little difference then why not vote for the democrat? If you feel obliged to vote for somebody on the ballot and if there is no difference anyway then what do you care? Just vote democrat then you can be honest when you say you don't care.
I bet you won't though. I get the feeling you'd rather die then to vote for a democrat.
If both solutions work and once costs less people will care. The tricky part is to get it to stage where it works well for a reasonable amount of people.
For me I think anything above 20% is just icing on the cake. Once Linux gets 20% desktop penetration the hardware vendors and the boneheaded web designers will not be afford to code just to the microsoft products.
" To try to simplify things beyond reason. Libertarians are really Republicans, because -- according to you -- they prefer Republicans to Democrats, given a choice between the two."
Why yes.
"The USA Patriot act was supported by Democrats too."
The patriot act was born in the republican party and lives in the republican party.
"The reason I'd rather have Bush over his Democrat counterparts is that Bush supports superior economic policy."
LOL. Thanks you made my day with one. I laughed so hard my beer came out of my nose.
"Furthermore, the anti-liberty social policies of Bush -- particularly, anti-choice and anti-gay rights -- are unlikely to go anywhere."
Not True. Bush will elect at least one if not two zealots into the supreme court. This will solidify and already right wing supreme court. Once that happens homosexuality will be illegal as well as abortion. It will also be a huge setback to all kinds of freedoms you thought you had.
" For the most part, when it comes to uniting against both the economic and social liberties of citizens, the Democratic and Republican parties are just two sides of the same coin."
And yet when push comes to shove you will choose a republican. Why not just admit that you are a republican?
Do you have any experience with any open source ones? I am curious if any of them are any good.
Wow. You really think that's the same thing? Really? Honestly?
When push comes to shove you will vote for a republican. That's what people who call themselves libertarians do. You will do this despite the fact in this case the leasing democrats are more iberterian then bush. They are less interventionists, want to give you more privacy, and less subsidies.
"The US invaded and bombed Yugoslavia."
You remember a civil war going on there? You remember the massacres going on there?
"So you are saying that these embargoes were lifted just as the violence against the Kurds and the East Timorese was reaching its climax? "
I am saying there is no cause and effect relationship there. Our relationship with Turkey is complex and long lasting. We have listening posts there, we have military bases there. We have intelligence, army and navy presence there. And we have had them for a long time before and after clinton.
"Right, so making something up is better than reading it somewhere"
reading a lie is no different then making it up.
"And there are plenty of examples where violence and tyranny was stopped. The massacre of the Jews, Roma, Homosexuals, and others, by the Nazis was stopped. Slavery in America was stopped. Violence in Timor was stopped (eventually). EU peace keepers are in the DRC right now trying to stop violence."
None of that took place overnight. None of it took place without a groundswell of public participation. None of it happened because of an american president made it happen. Most of the examples you stated ended through extremely violent events that took tens of thousands of lives. How many people died trying to end slavery? How many died opposing hitler?
You know what? You are a simple minded moron. You are unable to understand the complexities of life. Your brain is unable to process too many facts so you pick the most simple minded answer and grip it in your pea brain with all your might.
Turkey is evil, indonesia is evil, clinton is evil, US invaded yugoslavia and bombed them for fun. You read simple minded sites and believe that their version of reality is the only one. You should travel and maybe learn a couple of languages. At least a few history books or something. You can start anywhere you want. Read about the PKK or the conflict between the serbians and the bosnians.
" To get Defragmenting, disk diagnostics, remote desktop client, tcp stack, the terminal emulator, accesibility and zip utilities you had to upgrade your O.S. This is a purchase"
That's a cop out and you know it.
You know what you already lost the casual reader. You can't compete with the PR power of RIAA. As far as the casual reader is concerned you are a thief.
It's also worth noting that the casual reader can be convinced of anything. Before the war something like 60% of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9-11. After the war the number is still above 40%. If people can be convinced to be loyal to one brand of sugared water over another they can be convinced of anything.
" References do not include the statements of some liberal supporter who's written an obviously biased argument."
The economist is a liberal publication? Since when? Oh I get it, the facts disagree with you so the facts must be liberal.
The economist hates america! The economist is a traitor!
Take your blinds off man. Why are republicans so god damned stupid.
Have you ever heard of the homeland security act? Have you heard of of the dept of homeland security? Yes GW created a whole new dept and a HUGE one at that. He also increased defense spending, imposed tariffs on steel and other products, increased farm subsidies, increased subsidies for logging, reversed clinton and increased subsidies for grazing fees.
Not only has Bush increased the size of the govt, increased govt spending he has also increased govt surveillance, increased intrusive laws, abolished many forms of privacy and continues to fight to make you less free every day.
Too bad political zealots like you are unable to get past bumber sticker slogans like "republicans want less govt" and "republicans want to get the govt off of peoples backs" or "republicans are more fiscally conservative".
The facts point out otherwise. Republicans spend more money then deomocrats, they are less fiscally responsible and they pass even more intrusive laws putting the govt not only on our backs but in our bedrooms and bodies too.
Please don't feed facts to political zealots.
"but I doubt that had anything to do with the US. That was because of his ties to organized crime."
I am not arguing that US had nothing to do with it just that they were not the primary motivators for it. Also your original post said something about an invation which is way out of line.
"So dramatically increasing arm sales to Turkey as the oppression of the Kurds was reaching its zenith is not considered "help"?
Here are some non-socialist links. "
Once again you are making the claim that US increased arms sales so that turkey could kill more kurds when that's not the case at all. Arms sales to turkey were increased because an embargo previously placed was lifted. That was all negotiated via the UN and US and was tied to liberilization of Turkish policies. As for the PKK they are recognized as a terrorist organization by the UN, the US and Turkey. You are spinning the story to make it one sided.
"The Clinton administration increased weapons sales to Indonesia as the oppression and murder of the East Timorese peaked."
See above.
"Do you have a source to verify that?"
The oil for food program was initiated by clinton. Clinton also looked away when Iraq resumed oil sales to sryia and turkey and traded heavily with turkey, syria and iran.
"You may not like socialist sources, but that's better than having no source at all."
No it's not.
"To try to save peoples lives."
People are dying all over the world. People die all over the world under all presidents. You seem to think that it's all Bill Clinton's fault which shows how stupid you are. People died all over the world before Bill Clinton was born, before he was the president, and after presidency. You are critizing Bill Clinton because he failed to stop death and tyranny. Well guess what nobody can. Nobody has, nobody will.
Martha Stewar is a well known democrat. Kenneth Lay is a well known republican.
Martha Stewart avoided losing about 40 grand through allegedly shady dealings. Kenneth lay stole billions of dollars from Enron employees and shareholders.
Martha Steward is going to be tried. Kenneth Lay is scott free and will never be tried for anything.
This justice dept is the most politically motived one ever. Only democrats go to jail (that and arabs of course)
"Right. A Democrat is someone who likes to call himself a philanthropist because he spends my money on his "good causes"."
And yet George Bush has increased the size of the govt more then any other president in recent history.
First you say.
"Came as a surprise to me, seeing as I usually think like a moderate."
Then you say.
"I'd probably throw a vote his way if I had the chance, mostly because I see him as the lesser of the three democratic evils in the race."
How can be a moderate while refering to democrats as evil?
Hunter S thompson once said that an election was like a tree dropping it's leaves and getting new ones. Same damned tree and the new leaves are exactly like the old ones.
Does that mean that we should not try to even attempt to improve our winner take all system?
Why would the major media report on something that benefits them so much? It was in their interest not to report on it.
" Well there's the obvious invasion of Yugoslavia and installing a US friendly leader who dissolved the country into Serbia and Montenegro, and was then promptly assassinated."
Now that's what I call spin!. Bravo!.
"But there's also the enforcing of murderous sanctions that were, up until the second Iraq invasion a few months ago, killing 5000 children each month (UN and WHO numbers). "
The sanctions were immorall, hideous and downright evil. Clinton did not initiate them. Although he did not lift them either he did ease them up a bit.
"And the bombings in the illegally enforced no-fly zones which included the bombing and killing of dangerous and deadly sheep."
Also illegal, immoral and evil. Also unfortunately a policy he inherited. He should have stopped it but it's worth noting that the bombings increased markedly as soon as Bush took over.
"Of course there's also helping turkey massacre 30,000 kurds. "
Bill Clinton did not "help turkey". That's just a plain old lie. The Turks have been plagued with kurdish terrorism for years. This too is a long standing issue that has been going on for decades. Kurds routinely exploded bombs in crowded cities like Istanbul, burned forests, kidnapped and killed civillians. This is not nearly one sided as you present it. Finally I would not take the word of a socialist party web site as the absolute word on any issue let alone this one.
"Giving the draconian and terrorist government of Colombia billions in military aid."
Mostly to fight drugs. Again I disagree with the policy but he inherited that one too.
" Increasing weapons sales to Indonesia and trying to cover for them, and delay the UN in acting to stop the massacre in East Timor."
Please don't mention East Timor without also mentioning Kissinger, perhaps the most evil war criminal of all time.
Really the things you mention are simply leaving in place policies he inherited. There would have been massive opposition to changing any of them given a republican congress. Could you imagine if CLinton tried to stop the sanctions or stopped money to columbia? It would have been a stupid fight to get into and he would have lost anyway. Why waste political clout when you know you are going to lose?