Now maybe we can see where the Secret Service lies on that scale Microsoft and the Scientologists lay on.
We know Slashdot conceded to the Scientologists and held fast against Microsoft. Will 'hosting a conspiracy to assassinate the president' take 'em down or not?
Or will the Secret Service even take a bunch of monitor-tanned nerds seriously?
An old timer around campus used to say: 'isms are schisms.'
The framers of the US constitution were for the most part in favor of private property, and firmly against state encroachment into private enterprise.
You can throw around your 'mercantilism/socialism/capitalism' jargon all you want. You're imposing a bunch of modern terms onto the historical record. You flunk.
I always put CheapBytes stickers on the Red Hat boxes. Nobody should pay more than $3 for a Red Hat distro. You can get a good third-party book on Linux (preferrably one of the good O'Reilly titles) with the money you save.
Re:Red Hat remains in red: Posts $27.6M net loss
on
Red Hat In The Black
·
· Score: 1
Needless to say that announcements like this serve to smoke out the ignorant. Doubtless there are clueful people out there waiting for the jubilant fools to sink their cash into RHAT, based on these hype figures.
"So ya think Red Hat is over the hurdle? Here, buy some more shares from me."
Re:...I thought open source was bad for business??
on
Red Hat In The Black
·
· Score: 1
There are thousands of software vendors making a profit right now. Many aren't publicly traded companies. Few are dispensing an Open Source product.
Actually, no matter how much of a traffic delay it causes you (up to a reasonable limit, of course), it's worth it when you finally get to slowly roll by the smoking hulk. In particular if there's still some glass left in it for you to bust out.
I have a DEC Alpha motherboard at home. It only has firmware to run Windows NT. It's list price was about $1000. I went out checking, and discovered that what appears to be the same motherboard, but with firmware that can run Digital UNIX, lists for $2500. (actual number may be different, I don't recal specifics, but it was at least 2.5 times as expensive to buy the same motherboard equipped to run Digital UNIX)
Hardware vendors can 'license' their hardware to run specific software if they choose.
It sucked, because I definitely wanted to run more than Windows NT on that motherboard (it was one of the cheap 275 MHz AT boards they were selling on computersurplusoutlet.com a few years ago). There was a toolkit one could buy to replace the firmware, but it was expensive.
I don't think it's my business, your business, or anybody but the people paying for and providing the power to determine what the price should be for said power.
Let the market decide. Get goverment out of the loop entirely.
For some reason I am guessing that isn't your position on the issue.
I would agree with you. But only to the degree that unions don't use government to mandate their existence.
There should be no 'Closed Shop' laws. Companies should not by law be prevented from booting out featherbedding Union members. It should all be settled in Contract Law, and if employees want to 'band together' and form collective bargaining units that's their right. It's the Companie's right to refuse to have anything to do with said employees, if they wish.
Otherwise, you're talking about government mandates, which goes against the whole notion of 'capitalism' you (supposedly) espouse.
Nobody said that liberals and 'progressives' had to use logic in their arguements. I mean, look at the bleating masses who follow them. Logical arguement? Pshaw!
Part of what is killing Linux to newbies (newbie hackers, I mean, not newbie button clickers, which is another matter) is the default closing of all the 'holes' in commonly available Linux distributions.
Four years ago when I was first fiddling around learning how to Network computers together (on my mass of cast-off 386sx systems and ancient 3c501 and 3c503 cards) it was easy just to get stuff like NFS up and running Samba was wide open, friendly and it was trivial to throw together a bunch of boxes in the basement to start playing with networking.
These days everything is locked up as tight as a steel drum by default. The hassles inherent in getting any machines to interoperate are far greater than they used to be.
It's really a shame, in a way, because it used to be so cool just to throw Slackware on a bunch of boxes and start playing.
My point isn't that it's any harder for someone 'in the know' to get a network up and running. It's that everything is newbie-hostile these days, not newbie-friendly like in the olden times.
Lots of things are cheaper. They could rely on carrier pigeons, for example. Or implement a large state-wide network of pnuematic message tubes.
Oh wait! That would probably be more expensive.
The point is, 'cheap' is not always the only criterion. 'The Internet' is not the be-all and end-all of communications. It's frightening to watch so much infrastructure re-focusing on Internet-dependent mechanisms, to be honest.
So, if the GPL is completely declawed in court, the FSF has to scamper to come out with a new version. However, anything that was ever released under the earlier, now declawed, license, can be used however the court has reinterpeted the licence to read. In other words, the FSF will be scampering to update the license, and every software developer with code released under the older GPL will be scampering to add funtionality that will justify anybody using the version with the new revised license.
Sounds like a free for all to me, and the potential for much, much forking.
Slashdot Mirror
Now maybe we can see where the Secret Service lies on that scale Microsoft and the Scientologists lay on.
We know Slashdot conceded to the Scientologists and held fast against Microsoft. Will 'hosting a conspiracy to assassinate the president' take 'em down or not?
Or will the Secret Service even take a bunch of monitor-tanned nerds seriously?
I suspect the heat profile on a building full of grow lights is different than that of neighboring buildings with just people living in them.
Hence, this technology should be quite adequate for locating growers of various toxins.
An old timer around campus used to say: 'isms are schisms.'
The framers of the US constitution were for the most part in favor of private property, and firmly against state encroachment into private enterprise.
You can throw around your 'mercantilism/socialism/capitalism' jargon all you want. You're imposing a bunch of modern terms onto the historical record. You flunk.
Woops! There go all the researchers! Now where is the University going to get anybody to teach?
Oh, that's right. The underachievers and those with a political agenda will stick around. Ok.
We need a new law. Maybe we can call it Dogwind's law or something.
It's invoked any time somebody drags in Microsoft as the arch-villan in a completely off-topic fashion.
It'll be handed out lavishly on Slashdot, you can be certain of that.
technical detail in case the above wasn't explained sufficiently:
Sticker reads:
'Don't buy this box!
Go to http://www.cheapbytes.com
and save!'
I try to do my part as well.
I always put CheapBytes stickers on the Red Hat boxes. Nobody should pay more than $3 for a Red Hat distro. You can get a good third-party book on Linux (preferrably one of the good O'Reilly titles) with the money you save.
Needless to say that announcements like this serve to smoke out the ignorant. Doubtless there are clueful people out there waiting for the jubilant fools to sink their cash into RHAT, based on these hype figures.
"So ya think Red Hat is over the hurdle? Here, buy some more shares from me."
There are thousands of software vendors making a profit right now. Many aren't publicly traded companies. Few are dispensing an Open Source product.
Actually, no matter how much of a traffic delay it causes you (up to a reasonable limit, of course), it's worth it when you finally get to slowly roll by the smoking hulk. In particular if there's still some glass left in it for you to bust out.
It's their purpose in life to generate banner revenue, no matter how trollish the topic has to be on articles posted for our 'discussion.'
Hasn't everybody figured that part out by now??
That isn't as outlandish as it seems.
I have a DEC Alpha motherboard at home. It only has firmware to run Windows NT. It's list price was about $1000. I went out checking, and discovered that what appears to be the same motherboard, but with firmware that can run Digital UNIX, lists for $2500. (actual number may be different, I don't recal specifics, but it was at least 2.5 times as expensive to buy the same motherboard equipped to run Digital UNIX)
Hardware vendors can 'license' their hardware to run specific software if they choose.
It sucked, because I definitely wanted to run more than Windows NT on that motherboard (it was one of the cheap 275 MHz AT boards they were selling on computersurplusoutlet.com a few years ago). There was a toolkit one could buy to replace the firmware, but it was expensive.
Good grief. You parrot out some feel-good 'we are the government' pap from your Civics textbook and then you tell me I should grow up.
SETI users are Mostly Harmless ** users, actually.
(** Copyright, the estate of Douglass Adams)
I don't think it's my business, your business, or anybody but the people paying for and providing the power to determine what the price should be for said power.
Let the market decide. Get goverment out of the loop entirely.
For some reason I am guessing that isn't your position on the issue.
I make a point of only running software that I've downloaded from binary Warez Usenet newsgroups.
I would agree with you. But only to the degree that unions don't use government to mandate their existence.
There should be no 'Closed Shop' laws. Companies should not by law be prevented from booting out featherbedding Union members. It should all be settled in Contract Law, and if employees want to 'band together' and form collective bargaining units that's their right. It's the Companie's right to refuse to have anything to do with said employees, if they wish.
Otherwise, you're talking about government mandates, which goes against the whole notion of 'capitalism' you (supposedly) espouse.
So Unions are supposed to freeze a company dead in it's tracks? No job description anywhere is allowed to be changed?
When the job changes, you get another one, if you don't like what it's changed into.
Nobody said that liberals and 'progressives' had to use logic in their arguements. I mean, look at the bleating masses who follow them. Logical arguement? Pshaw!
"Paint a sign and let's go chant more slogans."
That level of certification would instantly wipe out 'Free Software' projects.
You're going to require 'certification' of all software???
Your 'the US government is eeeeevile' bullshit is, frankly, a rather weak arguement.
Keep trotting it out over and over, though. Maybe someone will take you seriously.
Part of what is killing Linux to newbies (newbie hackers, I mean, not newbie button clickers, which is another matter) is the default closing of all the 'holes' in commonly available Linux distributions.
Four years ago when I was first fiddling around learning how to Network computers together (on my mass of cast-off 386sx systems and ancient 3c501 and 3c503 cards) it was easy just to get stuff like NFS up and running Samba was wide open, friendly and it was trivial to throw together a bunch of boxes in the basement to start playing with networking.
These days everything is locked up as tight as a steel drum by default. The hassles inherent in getting any machines to interoperate are far greater than they used to be.
It's really a shame, in a way, because it used to be so cool just to throw Slackware on a bunch of boxes and start playing.
My point isn't that it's any harder for someone 'in the know' to get a network up and running. It's that everything is newbie-hostile these days, not newbie-friendly like in the olden times.
Lots of things are cheaper. They could rely on carrier pigeons, for example. Or implement a large state-wide network of pnuematic message tubes.
Oh wait! That would probably be more expensive.
The point is, 'cheap' is not always the only criterion. 'The Internet' is not the be-all and end-all of communications. It's frightening to watch so much infrastructure re-focusing on Internet-dependent mechanisms, to be honest.
Hmmm.
So it's got to be fundamental, hard to reproduce, and functional?
When will you have time to write the part of the code that people will care about enough to download and run?
So, if the GPL is completely declawed in court, the FSF has to scamper to come out with a new version. However, anything that was ever released under the earlier, now declawed, license, can be used however the court has reinterpeted the licence to read. In other words, the FSF will be scampering to update the license, and every software developer with code released under the older GPL will be scampering to add funtionality that will justify anybody using the version with the new revised license.
Sounds like a free for all to me, and the potential for much, much forking.