Microsoft has included BSD and GPL applications in their products in the past. And despite the dangerously viral nature of the GPL, much of Microsoft's products remain proprietary.
The problem is, you don't realize that there isn't anything in OSS that really competes with MS when it comes to home users.
By "home users", I assume you're talking about a standard desktop computer. For the sake of argument, let's say you're right about that. The thing is, there is so much else going on in the industry that home users and their desktops just aren't that important. Or, at least, they're not important beyond introducing future IT decision makers and developers to the Microsoft ecosystem.
You may shoehorn your friends and family into running Linux, but you didnt' really do them a favor and just because they don't bitch at you doesn't mean they like it.
YMMV. Me - I've given up on evangelizing and shoehorning friends and family. The funny thing about that is that last year, one of my household asked me to wipe her laptop and install Ubuntu. And she's been absolutely thrilled with it (although she does have her WinXP desktop for iTunes).
They get more publicity for being rapists and women hating sociopaths? Yeah. That's just what they are looking for I'm sure. Everyone will want to be associated with them then. Oh and Assange ends up in Swedish prison. Great plan.
No - they get publicity for being the "victim" of a dirty tricks campaign executed by a powerful enemy desperate to shut them down. Nobody goes to prison and, if done properly, there is no risk of anyone going to prison. Whether this is an intentional ploy or not, you have to admit that this is definitely the way events are playing out right now. You yourself seem to be following that path rather strongly.
Face it. Sometimes the guy standing there in front of the dead body with the bloody knife in his hands really *is* the killer. The evidence against the US government is circumstantial but it is very strong.
Sure. Now show me the bloody knife in the hands of the killer. There's no evidence linking any conspirators to this event.
But you want to turn it on its head and say that the US Government is the one being framed. Uh huh.
Sure - why not? One conspiracy is just as good as the other in this case. The US Government could be behind this. Wikileaks could be behind this. I see advantages for both. It seems to me that one side is being strongly taken because there is a large contingent that like Assange's politics.
Honestly, I doubt the above possibilities are the actual situation. I find it much more likely that either Assange really is a jerk or the two accusers are setting him up due to either personal issues or their own political agenda.
No, they LOSE credibility - haven't you been paying attention to the attitude of people in the comments here.
Yes, I have been paying attention to the attitude in the comments here. The vast majority seem absolutely certain (with a lesser extent generally favoring the idea) that this is US Government dirty tricks. That falls in line very nicely with their image of truth tellers fighting powerful enemies. And it very much provides them with credibility - all without any proof or actual said truth-telling activity. Or have you not been paying attention to the comments here?
So they put together a professional scam that has to hold up to expert scutiny with what skills to win exactly what?
Wikileaks (and Assange) get more publicity. They further cement their street cred as a cause with major powerful enemies. And they call for more donations (look at the posts here on Slashdot).
I wish I had his skill and his balls. He, at least, is going some way to watching the watchers.
I wish it was someone who wasn't so disposed towards propaganda. I really like the idea of Wikileaks. I don't like what it's become. And I've found myself liking Assange less and less as time goes on.
Before I go, let me just accuse every/. commenter below me in this article of rape. I hope you judge Assange for the accusations against him as you'd hope people treat mine against you.
And let me just note that these accusations are part of a massive international conspiracy to put me down. I've conveniently leaked the only documentation proving this conspiracy. Now give me money. And attention.
Well, to be honest, it does seem like more of a "we can do that too!" type of gesture. The US employs UAVs because, right or wrong, our military presence is effectively everywhere.
The UAV does seem to be the poster-child of US military power in the region. Whether or not the Iranian weapon system is effective on the battlefield probably isn't as important as the propaganda it will generate.
I used to catch his show all the time - PBS ran it right after Red Dwarf (and later, Chef) before they signed off for the night on Saturdays.
I think it was Dr. Who that had me first catching his show as the tail end of the Saturday broadcast. I've never really been that in to astronomy (not that I'm not in awe when I got a good look at the sky out at White Sands). However, The Star Hustler was infectious. I usually ended up watching his show and taking a look at the sky at his suggestions. A quirky show mixed with enthusiasm that invoked a sense of wonder that was surprisingly engaging; that was The Star Hustler.
I'd think Occam's razor points to either #4 or #5.... possibly #1. Those are the usual factors involved in rape cases that don't involve international publicity and military secret documents.
But if the US government helps put a gang of people in power, and members of that gang commit atrocities, you'd sorta expect that people would pin part of the blame on the US government (and anyone else who has supported the bad guys).
We are talking about the Taliban, right? Because the US did not support the Taliban; Pakistan did. In fact, the US was done with Afghanistan by the time the Taliban came in to existence. If anything, it is a lack of US action that brought about the Taliban.
The fact that there are other evil people in the world isn't justification for being evil yourself. No legal system anywhere accepts "Other people are committing crimes" as exoneration for a crime that you committed or were an accessory to.
That's not entirely true. Castle laws are an example where otherwise criminal behavior is accepted in response to criminal behavior.
The problem I have with many critics is the framing of their criticisms. For example - the concept that the US is responsible for the Taliban. That is, at best, a very stretched interpretation of history (US involvement in the area contributed to warlords and weapons which caused chaos in the power-vacuum of Soviet withdrawal). Yet we hear critics put forward this argument as if it is a simple truth. Furthermore, the criticisms tend to imply that US actions were entirely on-sided with no other interaction of other elements. The reality of most situations is much more complex. And while these criticisms make nice, effective little memes... they are ultimately deceptive.
I should note that I don't believe the US is without criticism. There are certainly times the US has made major mistakes. I find it especially critical when the US has acted on the world stage without proper understanding of a situation or based on entirely false assumptions when action wasn't time critical. Soviet actions have certainly required counter-actions but there are too many times when US behavior seemed to be driven by a "red scare" than actual events.
To a certain extent, you are correct. Military people off fighting wars do indeed make good money. We get tax-free wages while in war zones. We get lots of freebies as well: Free food, lodging, movie rentals, MWR - all while still earning our full paycheck. We also get hostility pay, separation pay (if you're married) and many other interesting bonuses. A few friends of mine just got back from Afghanistan a while ago and were treated to full paid vacations to Disney for themselves and their family. It's a perk, to say the least. Profit? I guess.
That all sounds very nice. But the pay sucks. The free food is rarely that good. The lodging tends to suck (to what degree depends largely on your branch of service). The movie rental selection isn't that great. MWR... well, they do a really good job with what they have, but MWR facilities rarely measure up to civilian counter-parts. Hostility pay / danger pay is a pittance for the risk. Separation pay is a pittance. The perks help make rough situations easier. But I'd be really wary of listing them as selling points.
As an aside - I remember the yearly report coming out that quantified all the perks to civilian dollar amounts. They were a joke. I know, for example, my local MWR gym was nothing like any of the health clubs in the nearby (small) town yet the report counted it as a perk in my salary comparison. No wonder we had congresswomen complaining about military housing as over-priced little Peyton Places (she was probably shown the best examples of officer housing). And Shades of Green? Nice. But a cut below even the mid-level Disney resort.
One soldier states that games like MoH and Call of Duty are 'profiteering from war
Oh boy, if that soldier only knew who was REALLY profiteering from war.
Maybe you two should have a conversation. From the article (the quote from the soldier in question):
More importantly, the creation of games like these is war profiteering; the same profiteering that Blackwater, civilian contractors, and companies that produce ACU backpacks for school children participate in. War profiteering of any form is unjust and constitutes a true insult to those who have served overseas.
It seems that he might have a better handle on this than you'd give credit for.
I don't agree with him - but that's a different conversation.
Oh, come now. Next thing you're going to say is that all religious rights, texts, and associated constructs... even the religions themselves are simply creations of man! What kind of crazy-talk is that?
The most popular distros already patched it days ago and others are currently in testing.
Yes, race. All that is part of it. But that doesn't put the kernal live on any given system. I have to take that step. And, depending on your environment, that may require a bunch of other operational steps.
I'm not making a comment on the difficulty of doing any of this (it tends to be quick and painless in most situations). I'm noting that this is, in fact, news. There IS something to see here. People who are in the position to update a kernal should know about this and know to push it (if they haven't already).
That's actually an inside joke. I did have a box that I had originally racked and set up on the rack KVM. Almost 2 years later, I was intending to walk up to the box and boot it in to single user mode to find out that someone had decided we never used the KVM port and had set it up for some other system. When I asked around, the best guess was that I had lost my spot on the KVM at least a year ago. I wondered aloud whether I needed to run a screensaver banner that claimed ownership of the KVM port to keep it.
And yes - the vast majority of interaction with that box was via SSH (although I had no reason to put it on a non-standard port).
Because if you don't have a flashy screensaver going, all the black will cause the damn Windows sysadmin to think that port of the KVM is unused and he can swipe it for another box.
Isn't it something to see / know about until one gets that fix out to the kernel on our live system(s)? We expect a speedy fix. Now begins the race to get the fix live.
Google relies on security through obscurity - they obscure the way in which pages are ranked to protect themselves against competitors, and users against SEOs.Granted that it doesn't prevent people from trying (and occasionally succeeding) in pushing up their results though.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft has included BSD and GPL applications in their products in the past. And despite the dangerously viral nature of the GPL, much of Microsoft's products remain proprietary.
The problem is, you don't realize that there isn't anything in OSS that really competes with MS when it comes to home users.
By "home users", I assume you're talking about a standard desktop computer. For the sake of argument, let's say you're right about that. The thing is, there is so much else going on in the industry that home users and their desktops just aren't that important. Or, at least, they're not important beyond introducing future IT decision makers and developers to the Microsoft ecosystem.
You may shoehorn your friends and family into running Linux, but you didnt' really do them a favor and just because they don't bitch at you doesn't mean they like it.
YMMV. Me - I've given up on evangelizing and shoehorning friends and family. The funny thing about that is that last year, one of my household asked me to wipe her laptop and install Ubuntu. And she's been absolutely thrilled with it (although she does have her WinXP desktop for iTunes).
They get more publicity for being rapists and women hating sociopaths? Yeah. That's just what they are looking for I'm sure. Everyone will want to be associated with them then. Oh and Assange ends up in Swedish prison. Great plan.
No - they get publicity for being the "victim" of a dirty tricks campaign executed by a powerful enemy desperate to shut them down. Nobody goes to prison and, if done properly, there is no risk of anyone going to prison. Whether this is an intentional ploy or not, you have to admit that this is definitely the way events are playing out right now. You yourself seem to be following that path rather strongly.
Face it. Sometimes the guy standing there in front of the dead body with the bloody knife in his hands really *is* the killer. The evidence against the US government is circumstantial but it is very strong.
Sure. Now show me the bloody knife in the hands of the killer. There's no evidence linking any conspirators to this event.
But you want to turn it on its head and say that the US Government is the one being framed. Uh huh.
Sure - why not? One conspiracy is just as good as the other in this case. The US Government could be behind this. Wikileaks could be behind this. I see advantages for both. It seems to me that one side is being strongly taken because there is a large contingent that like Assange's politics.
Honestly, I doubt the above possibilities are the actual situation. I find it much more likely that either Assange really is a jerk or the two accusers are setting him up due to either personal issues or their own political agenda.
No, they LOSE credibility - haven't you been paying attention to the attitude of people in the comments here.
Yes, I have been paying attention to the attitude in the comments here. The vast majority seem absolutely certain (with a lesser extent generally favoring the idea) that this is US Government dirty tricks. That falls in line very nicely with their image of truth tellers fighting powerful enemies. And it very much provides them with credibility - all without any proof or actual said truth-telling activity. Or have you not been paying attention to the comments here?
Oooh... Internet tough guy.
So they put together a professional scam that has to hold up to expert scutiny with what skills to win exactly what?
Wikileaks (and Assange) get more publicity. They further cement their street cred as a cause with major powerful enemies. And they call for more donations (look at the posts here on Slashdot).
The same CIA that instigated regime change in Iran and Guatemala.
I wish I had his skill and his balls. He, at least, is going some way to watching the watchers.
I wish it was someone who wasn't so disposed towards propaganda. I really like the idea of Wikileaks. I don't like what it's become. And I've found myself liking Assange less and less as time goes on.
Before I go, let me just accuse every /. commenter below me in this article of rape. I hope you judge Assange for the accusations against him as you'd hope people treat mine against you.
And let me just note that these accusations are part of a massive international conspiracy to put me down. I've conveniently leaked the only documentation proving this conspiracy. Now give me money. And attention.
Adding to that, much of the evidence against Reiser was basically how weird he was. That strikes a chord with this crowd.
similar to bush eh?
Two sides to the same coin.
Well, to be honest, it does seem like more of a "we can do that too!" type of gesture. The US employs UAVs because, right or wrong, our military presence is effectively everywhere.
The UAV does seem to be the poster-child of US military power in the region. Whether or not the Iranian weapon system is effective on the battlefield probably isn't as important as the propaganda it will generate.
"The Ambassador Of Death" sounds like the type of phrase Fox News would like. Is Iran intentionally angling for Fox attention? Why?
Because his brand of politics does best when the "other side" gets riled up.
I used to catch his show all the time - PBS ran it right after Red Dwarf (and later, Chef) before they signed off for the night on Saturdays.
I think it was Dr. Who that had me first catching his show as the tail end of the Saturday broadcast. I've never really been that in to astronomy (not that I'm not in awe when I got a good look at the sky out at White Sands). However, The Star Hustler was infectious. I usually ended up watching his show and taking a look at the sky at his suggestions. A quirky show mixed with enthusiasm that invoked a sense of wonder that was surprisingly engaging; that was The Star Hustler.
I'd think Occam's razor points to either #4 or #5.... possibly #1. Those are the usual factors involved in rape cases that don't involve international publicity and military secret documents.
But if the US government helps put a gang of people in power, and members of that gang commit atrocities, you'd sorta expect that people would pin part of the blame on the US government (and anyone else who has supported the bad guys).
We are talking about the Taliban, right? Because the US did not support the Taliban; Pakistan did. In fact, the US was done with Afghanistan by the time the Taliban came in to existence. If anything, it is a lack of US action that brought about the Taliban.
The fact that there are other evil people in the world isn't justification for being evil yourself. No legal system anywhere accepts "Other people are committing crimes" as exoneration for a crime that you committed or were an accessory to.
That's not entirely true. Castle laws are an example where otherwise criminal behavior is accepted in response to criminal behavior.
The problem I have with many critics is the framing of their criticisms. For example - the concept that the US is responsible for the Taliban. That is, at best, a very stretched interpretation of history (US involvement in the area contributed to warlords and weapons which caused chaos in the power-vacuum of Soviet withdrawal). Yet we hear critics put forward this argument as if it is a simple truth. Furthermore, the criticisms tend to imply that US actions were entirely on-sided with no other interaction of other elements. The reality of most situations is much more complex. And while these criticisms make nice, effective little memes... they are ultimately deceptive.
I should note that I don't believe the US is without criticism. There are certainly times the US has made major mistakes. I find it especially critical when the US has acted on the world stage without proper understanding of a situation or based on entirely false assumptions when action wasn't time critical. Soviet actions have certainly required counter-actions but there are too many times when US behavior seemed to be driven by a "red scare" than actual events.
"That soldier profited from war."
To a certain extent, you are correct. Military people off fighting wars do indeed make good money. We get tax-free wages while in war zones. We get lots of freebies as well: Free food, lodging, movie rentals, MWR - all while still earning our full paycheck. We also get hostility pay, separation pay (if you're married) and many other interesting bonuses. A few friends of mine just got back from Afghanistan a while ago and were treated to full paid vacations to Disney for themselves and their family. It's a perk, to say the least. Profit? I guess.
That all sounds very nice. But the pay sucks. The free food is rarely that good. The lodging tends to suck (to what degree depends largely on your branch of service). The movie rental selection isn't that great. MWR... well, they do a really good job with what they have, but MWR facilities rarely measure up to civilian counter-parts. Hostility pay / danger pay is a pittance for the risk. Separation pay is a pittance. The perks help make rough situations easier. But I'd be really wary of listing them as selling points.
As an aside - I remember the yearly report coming out that quantified all the perks to civilian dollar amounts. They were a joke. I know, for example, my local MWR gym was nothing like any of the health clubs in the nearby (small) town yet the report counted it as a perk in my salary comparison. No wonder we had congresswomen complaining about military housing as over-priced little Peyton Places (she was probably shown the best examples of officer housing). And Shades of Green? Nice. But a cut below even the mid-level Disney resort.
One soldier states that games like MoH and Call of Duty are 'profiteering from war
Oh boy, if that soldier only knew who was REALLY profiteering from war.
Maybe you two should have a conversation. From the article (the quote from the soldier in question):
It seems that he might have a better handle on this than you'd give credit for.
I don't agree with him - but that's a different conversation.
Oh, come now. Next thing you're going to say is that all religious rights, texts, and associated constructs... even the religions themselves are simply creations of man! What kind of crazy-talk is that?
Race?
The most popular distros already patched it days ago and others are currently in testing.
Yes, race. All that is part of it. But that doesn't put the kernal live on any given system. I have to take that step. And, depending on your environment, that may require a bunch of other operational steps.
I'm not making a comment on the difficulty of doing any of this (it tends to be quick and painless in most situations). I'm noting that this is, in fact, news. There IS something to see here. People who are in the position to update a kernal should know about this and know to push it (if they haven't already).
That's actually an inside joke. I did have a box that I had originally racked and set up on the rack KVM. Almost 2 years later, I was intending to walk up to the box and boot it in to single user mode to find out that someone had decided we never used the KVM port and had set it up for some other system. When I asked around, the best guess was that I had lost my spot on the KVM at least a year ago. I wondered aloud whether I needed to run a screensaver banner that claimed ownership of the KVM port to keep it.
And yes - the vast majority of interaction with that box was via SSH (although I had no reason to put it on a non-standard port).
Because if you don't have a flashy screensaver going, all the black will cause the damn Windows sysadmin to think that port of the KVM is unused and he can swipe it for another box.
Isn't it something to see / know about until one gets that fix out to the kernel on our live system(s)? We expect a speedy fix. Now begins the race to get the fix live.
Oh. Wait. I see what you did there; you're being ironic.
Google relies on security through obscurity - they obscure the way in which pages are ranked to protect themselves against competitors, and users against SEOs.Granted that it doesn't prevent people from trying (and occasionally succeeding) in pushing up their results though.
I wouldn't call page-rank a security mechanism.
I wonder how many LOCcats that would end up being.
(Libraries of Congresses filled with cats)