" fox does give air time to republicans. but it gives equal time to democrats."
THis is a flat out lie. Fox TV is OVERWHELMINGLY republican. They give the democrats something like 10% of their time.
When they do have deomocrats they rip into them like dogs and contantly interrupt them and when they have republicans on they ask them questions like "isn't janet reno evil?" and lob softballs at them all night.
You are not counting "soft money" and the money raised by "think tanks".
Also there are organizations like the US chamber of commerce, Fox news (all murdoch media actually) which not only provide funding but give free air time to republicans and the republican point of view.
Tenure does not always help either. Look at the university of montana environmental studies program for example. Right now the logging and mining industries are bribing the Montana legisture to cut off funding for the program because the professors are not advocating unilimited logging. Once the funding is cut off it won't matter if you are tenured or not the entire dept will dissolve.
BTW. The Montana legislature is extrememly cheap. Their votes can be bought for what a NY congressman pays for parking!.
"he reason being is that users do no like to change the way they work."
And yet they often do. The hard truth is that the users will do what you tell them to because their jobs are on the line. They will bitch and moan but they will either do it or get fired.
If the comapny has a vision and if the company has a plan which it thinks will make them more competitive then there is no reason to stop that plan because the user don't want to change the way they work.
It's not up to the users to determine strategic planning for a company that't the managements job.
Note: I am not saying that the management is infallible or that they should not listen to the users just that it's their job to take risks and to advance the productivity and the profitability of the company. If that means that the current tools are scrapped and new ones intalled then so be it.
Re:Bible re. making money
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
" But "making money" doesn't imply accumulating more than you need."
Yes sure if you want to nit pick. Ask anybody how much money they want though and you'll get a number much bigger then what they "need".
Capitalism encourages greed, gluttonny, pride, lust, sloth and the rest of the seven deadly sins.
think about it. Usury is a sin, what would capitalism be without lending and interest?
capitalims is anti-christian and pro satanist. there is no was to get around that fact.
Re:Bible re. making money
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
Why would somebody accumulate more money then they need if they didn't love it.
Jesus preached that you should live a simple and humble life. He preached that you should spend your life helping others not making yourself richer.
Budha also preached poverty.
Mohammed didn't seem to mind wealth as much but he too preached a life of service to others.
The satanist religion on the other hand advocates the accumulation of wealth (and power) as a moral goal.
Re:Saw this on Google News a while back
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
" Are you equating 'religion' with 'moral framework'?"
No.
It's just that the people I mentioned have been the most influencial moral thinkers in all of history. There have been many great moral thinkers in the past few thousand years and I can't think of that many who advocated the accumulation of wealth as a moral or spritual goal. I pointed out that the founder of the church of satan is one of them. I am sure there have been others.
Perhaps you can make a list for me, I really can't think of too many.
"People crash, they're buggy and they dont have a development team working on them. Computers crash because people cant catch that one little fatal error in 10,000 lines of code. "
While this statement is true it's also a cop out. In the last twenty years there have been tremendous amount of advances in computer science and languages and yet everybody still programs in C.
That is the reason why programs crash. Why don't people use languages that make programs more failsafe and make programmers more productive.
It would be interesting to do a study of the "bugginess" of programs written in python, java, scheme, smalltak, lisp etc. My guess is that programs written in C crash the most.
Where are all the programs written in scheme or smalltalk or ML?
Use better languages and crash less.
Re:Saw this on Google News a while back
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
"Making money is as morally ambiguous as wearing a blue shirt or having an apple for breakfast. "
From the bible.
"It is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle."
"Love of money is the root of all evil."
Jesus preached more then once that making money (at least in excess of what you need to live) was actually immoral.
So did budha BTW.
Re:Saw this on Google News a while back
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
"Err well making money is arguably morally good."
Sez who?
Jesus continually preached against the evils of greed and accumulation of wealth.
Budha preached poverty and chastity.
Mohammed didn't mind accumulation of wealth nearly as much as Jesus did.
Anton Levay (the founder of satanism) was all for getting rich as you can.
The only moral framework which actually encourages making money is satanism.
" Personally, I think the country is happier with the Supreme Court making a de facto decision* on the president than turning it over to the House of Representatives. "
I think that what you would be happier with is irrelevant. The constitution says it should have went to congress and the SCOUS ignored that bit of the constitutions and took it upon themselves to rig the election.
"gah! Spare me the political indoctrination, please."
Yes. It's better to leave organized struggles to corporations. We should just run around like chickens with their heads cut off.
Re:X-Box Troll Handbook
on
Hacking the XBox
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
There is no need to any of that. Just point out that buying an Xbox makes the richest man in the world even richer. Buying an xbox helps MS destroy competitors, helps them fight open source, helps them destory other software and hardware manufacturers.
"a) MS has a lot of "clout" and is not going away anytime soon "
Sure but they won't be as powerful as they are today. It's downhill from here for MS because they only have a few products that make any profit and all those products are in the process of becoming free commodoties.
" there are MANY MANY people with financially vested interests who "depend" on MS to make a living."
Sure just like there are millions of car mechanics who are gainfully employed fixing fords. If Ford wen out of business those same mechanics would fix chevys. Those people you talk about are not married to MS, they only work on MS stuff because it's the most popular. Once the MS popularity starts decreasing they will switch.
"I don't trust Microsoft in general, but in this case they've yet to prove that their intentions are any other than making quality software."
What an odd thing to say. You don't trust them in general buy you trust them in this particular case? Why? That's like saying "I don't trust that convicted child molester living across from me but I'll let him babysit my kids because nobody has proven he will abuse MY kids".
" Would you doubt that Microsoft employs that many ppl"
You didn't read my post did you? I didn't say that MS didn't employ 50K people just that 50K is not that many. In the forbes top 500 MS does not even make it to the top 100.
"if you count indirect employment as well (ie: consulting, help desk, network admin, development, outsourcing, etc) ? Most of the ppl I know in IT have, at some point worked on Microsoft stuff. If I were a betting man, I'd say Microsoft is responsible for millions and millions of jobs around the country. "
I don't count everybody who buys gasoline as an employee of exxon, I don't count everybody who shops at walmart as an employee of walmart, why would I count people who worked with MS software as MS employees?
" Not only was the original Sherman Anti-trust act passed under a Republican administration, the largest breakup after Standard Oil, the breakup of AT&T, took place during a Republican Administration."
The reporters were not allowed to show anything that might make the US military look bad.
Instead they only showed happy iraquis who were waving american flags. Of course the american public was too stupid to ask where the iraqis got those american flags in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
" and CNN, CBS, ABC are neutral?"
They are more neutral then fox news.
" fox does give air time to republicans. but it gives equal time to democrats."
THis is a flat out lie. Fox TV is OVERWHELMINGLY republican. They give the democrats something like 10% of their time.
When they do have deomocrats they rip into them like dogs and contantly interrupt them and when they have republicans on they ask them questions like "isn't janet reno evil?" and lob softballs at them all night.
You are not counting "soft money" and the money raised by "think tanks".
Also there are organizations like the US chamber of commerce, Fox news (all murdoch media actually) which not only provide funding but give free air time to republicans and the republican point of view.
It's illegal to put linux on an Xbox. Why would somebody risk a lawsuit or god forbid a jail sentence to make a cluster?
Tenure does not always help either. Look at the university of montana environmental studies program for example. Right now the logging and mining industries are bribing the Montana legisture to cut off funding for the program because the professors are not advocating unilimited logging. Once the funding is cut off it won't matter if you are tenured or not the entire dept will dissolve.
BTW. The Montana legislature is extrememly cheap. Their votes can be bought for what a NY congressman pays for parking!.
"he reason being is that users do no like to change the way they work."
And yet they often do. The hard truth is that the users will do what you tell them to because their jobs are on the line. They will bitch and moan but they will either do it or get fired.
If the comapny has a vision and if the company has a plan which it thinks will make them more competitive then there is no reason to stop that plan because the user don't want to change the way they work.
It's not up to the users to determine strategic planning for a company that't the managements job.
Note: I am not saying that the management is infallible or that they should not listen to the users just that it's their job to take risks and to advance the productivity and the profitability of the company. If that means that the current tools are scrapped and new ones intalled then so be it.
" But "making money" doesn't imply accumulating more than you need."
Yes sure if you want to nit pick. Ask anybody how much money they want though and you'll get a number much bigger then what they "need".
Capitalism encourages greed, gluttonny, pride, lust, sloth and the rest of the seven deadly sins.
think about it. Usury is a sin, what would capitalism be without lending and interest?
capitalims is anti-christian and pro satanist. there is no was to get around that fact.
Why would somebody accumulate more money then they need if they didn't love it.
Jesus preached that you should live a simple and humble life. He preached that you should spend your life helping others not making yourself richer.
Budha also preached poverty.
Mohammed didn't seem to mind wealth as much but he too preached a life of service to others.
The satanist religion on the other hand advocates the accumulation of wealth (and power) as a moral goal.
" Are you equating 'religion' with 'moral framework'?"
No.
It's just that the people I mentioned have been the most influencial moral thinkers in all of history. There have been many great moral thinkers in the past few thousand years and I can't think of that many who advocated the accumulation of wealth as a moral or spritual goal.
I pointed out that the founder of the church of satan is one of them. I am sure there have been others.
Perhaps you can make a list for me, I really can't think of too many.
"People crash, they're buggy and they dont have a development team working on them. Computers crash because people cant catch that one little fatal error in 10,000 lines of code. "
While this statement is true it's also a cop out. In the last twenty years there have been tremendous amount of advances in computer science and languages and yet everybody still programs in C.
That is the reason why programs crash. Why don't people use languages that make programs more failsafe and make programmers more productive.
It would be interesting to do a study of the "bugginess" of programs written in python, java, scheme, smalltak, lisp etc. My guess is that programs written in C crash the most.
Where are all the programs written in scheme or smalltalk or ML?
Use better languages and crash less.
"Making money is as morally ambiguous as wearing a blue shirt or having an apple for breakfast. "
From the bible.
"It is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle."
"Love of money is the root of all evil."
Jesus preached more then once that making money (at least in excess of what you need to live) was actually immoral.
So did budha BTW.
"Err well making money is arguably morally good."
Sez who?
Jesus continually preached against the evils of greed and accumulation of wealth.
Budha preached poverty and chastity.
Mohammed didn't mind accumulation of wealth nearly as much as Jesus did.
Anton Levay (the founder of satanism) was all for getting rich as you can.
The only moral framework which actually encourages making money is satanism.
" Personally, I think the country is happier with the Supreme Court making a de facto decision* on the president than turning it over to the House of Representatives. "
I think that what you would be happier with is irrelevant. The constitution says it should have went to congress and the SCOUS ignored that bit of the constitutions and took it upon themselves to rig the election.
"gah! Spare me the political indoctrination, please."
Yes. It's better to leave organized struggles to corporations. We should just run around like chickens with their heads cut off.
There is no need to any of that. Just point out that buying an Xbox makes the richest man in the world even richer. Buying an xbox helps MS destroy competitors, helps them fight open source, helps them destory other software and hardware manufacturers.
Truth is always more powerful then anything else.
"a) MS has a lot of "clout" and is not going away anytime soon "
Sure but they won't be as powerful as they are today. It's downhill from here for MS because they only have a few products that make any profit and all those products are in the process of becoming free commodoties.
" there are MANY MANY people with financially vested interests who "depend" on MS to make a living."
Sure just like there are millions of car mechanics who are gainfully employed fixing fords. If Ford wen out of business those same mechanics would fix chevys. Those people you talk about are not married to MS, they only work on MS stuff because it's the most popular. Once the MS popularity starts decreasing they will switch.
"I don't trust Microsoft in general, but in this case they've yet to prove that their intentions are any other than making quality software."
What an odd thing to say. You don't trust them in general buy you trust them in this particular case? Why? That's like saying "I don't trust that convicted child molester living across from me but I'll let him babysit my kids because nobody has proven he will abuse MY kids".
" Would you doubt that Microsoft employs that many ppl"
You didn't read my post did you? I didn't say that MS didn't employ 50K people just that 50K is not that many. In the forbes top 500 MS does not even make it to the top 100.
"if you count indirect employment as well (ie: consulting, help desk, network admin, development, outsourcing, etc) ? Most of the ppl I know in IT have, at some point worked on Microsoft stuff. If I were a betting man, I'd say Microsoft is responsible for millions and millions of jobs around the country. "
I don't count everybody who buys gasoline as an employee of exxon, I don't count everybody who shops at walmart as an employee of walmart, why would I count people who worked with MS software as MS employees?
Rationalization and denial. The most powerful forces in the human psyche.
"Microsoft employs over 50,000 people directly "
This sounds like a lot but it's not. Walmart has 1.3 million employees. In fact microsoft does not even crack the top 25 employers in the forbes list.
" Not only was the original Sherman Anti-trust act passed under a Republican administration, the largest breakup after Standard Oil, the breakup of AT&T, took place during a Republican Administration."
That was then. Today it's completely different.
"This may come as a shock to you, but I'm not "rabidly" pro or anti anything."
I think your bias is apparent to anybody who bothers to read your posts. Just like my bias is.
Everybody knows windows does not require any man hours at all. Windows networks and workstations run themselves.
"Why do you say that?"
mmm... Because it is!. It looks like a duck, walks like a duck, smells like a duck and sounds like a duck.
I am sure all five people who use those languages are very happy.
The reporters were not allowed to show anything that might make the US military look bad.
Instead they only showed happy iraquis who were waving american flags. Of course the american public was too stupid to ask where the iraqis got those american flags in the first place.