5) Providing just enough competition to keep SBC et al on their toes...
Just a few years ago SBC was headed towards becoming the next AT&T. All it took was digital cell phones, VoIP, and a massive growth in cable internet to almost completely reverse the trend.
Now they probably think they can put the cable co.'s and whatever cell providers are left out of business by bundling, and quickly get back to business as usual. It's good to see that the cable co.'s at least can play ball.
I was waiting for this comment. If I had mod points, you'd get them.
This is yet another brilliant mindfuck by Microsoft. It's nothing but win-win-win, all around.
The script-kiddie-MCSE's still think they are 133t as they hack around it. The mouth-breathing idiots will have to buy a legit copy. MS execs can say to their shareholders "see, we're trying to stop piracy." They can say to their critics "it's impossible to write secure software, so buy the new MS antivirus!" Less knowledgeable members of the OSS crowd will continue to underestimate the very real threat that hardware DRM poses.
Remember how that ex-military guy was all up in arms about video games a few years back? He was basically making the rounds on all the political talkshows saying that video games caused violence, and, oh yeah, he was a colonel or something. Did that seem strange to anybody else?
What if this whole dog and pony show is more nefarious? What if video games are channelling teenage aggression into outlets that cannot be harnessed and exploited by the military? What if kids these days would rather sit at home and shoot terrorists on their television than sign up to shoot dissidents in Iraq?
It's been known for a long time that football encourages the kind of violence and groupthink that is a useful precursor to military training. What if violent video games have the opposite effect? Would you expect our politicians to come out for or against them?
You can buy one as soon as you come up with something to give the Chinese in return.
Preferably something that a) isn't a military secret, b) isn't an energy company, c) isn't US real estate, and definitely d) isn't just old chips to be recycled.
Retribution and justice are not so different. Most generally held definitions of justice have long since absorbed the concept of retribution. While the word 'justice' may have originally meant something like 'goodness', the two departed thousands of years ago.
Even in the most enlightened societies, killing is generally held to be murder only when unjustified. Self-defense and capital punishment are both widely-accepted exceptions. Many would even add reasonable police action as an exception to murder. I doubt we'll ever see the bobbies who killed that person the other day on trial for murder.
In short, I'm not disagreeing with your assessment. But the dichotomy you assume between justice and retribution is demonstrably false. 'Justice' is yet another in a long list of words that have been hijacked and expanded by the doublespeak of the ages.
Racism, on the other hand, is what has prevented my country, twice in the last century, from letting other, more competent nations run rampant over your miserable, pompous little island.
So, forgive me if I don't give a shit what your views are on my country's laws.
As for privacy concerns, remember than thanks to CCTV on the London underground, one of yesterday's attempted suicide bombers was caught and shot dead.
Wow, don't you feel like a fucking idiot now? Now that, instead of killing a "potential terrorist" your asinine ideas have killed an innocent person? Do you think maybe it's best that you go back to that policy of prohibiting your dipshit cops from carrying weapons?
Isn't it frustrating that all your attempts to be a fucking man-of-action do-gooder dipshit end up causing more harm than good? Or does the outcome of your actions even register? Do you get a sick perverted pleasure from fucking up people's lives, even? Do you Brits need more mental hospitals over there or something?
The next time a US law is discussed on Slashdot, you Brits should just shut the fuck up and mind you own God damn business. You, personally, however, are getting an honored spot on my foes list for this and other recent trolls.
as he can close the software without having to worry about the lawyers coming round complaining about your code violating some obscure GPL snippet.
Sorry, but when you said "use" there I guess you really meant "close". Which is really more like "prevent others from using". Which is exactly what I was saying to begin with.
The GPL gives you freedom as long as you respect the freedom of others, ie. "the little guy".
it forces you to release software which doesn't even contain GPL code
This, of course, is complete bullshit. I can't even imagine how you could concoct such an idiocy. If you're not just trolling, why don't you tell us?
The real difference...
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The reason you'll see just as many BSD fanatics as Linux nuts is for just the same reason: the license.
*BSD is a stable, secure OS with a proprietary-friendly, open source license. Linux is a stable, secure OS with a proprietary-hostile, open source license.
90% of the actual software that runs on the two is exactly the same. However, each has its own kernel and basic libraries.
Re:FreeBSD is free'er, MacOS X better for users
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: -1, Troll
the less free GPL's restrictions are meant to be benevolent for certain users.
Of course, you say the GPL is "benevolent" because it guarantees the freedom of the little guy. Freedom means nothing unless it's extended to the poorest among us.
The BSD brand of freedom is like the US before the civil-war. Freedom for a small group of capitalists. Freedom for those capable of enslaving others. The GPL, on the other hand, means freedom for everyone.
I'm assuming that your description of people who "want" to see your ads really means people who don't actually know they "want" to.
Do what the rest of the advertising world does, and reward people who look at your ads.
Depending on your target market, there are infinitely many ways to do this. If your "customer" lists really are "targeted", you should already know what would entice people to your "service".
You're right, this would be easy to get around. If you're not doing business in a state, I don't see how they can sue you except in federal court anyways.
Except telemarketers probably have POPs in each state (each area code even) to avoid long distance fees. Technically, they're doing business in every state. They just want it both ways.
it is based on the concept that a wife is property of her husband
No it isn't. It's equally valid for husbands who leave their wives. It's based on the concept of marriage as a contract, in the same way as the "tortious interference" claims we see here.
Distilleries have waste heat left over at the end. They need heat at the beginning. Just move this heat from the end to the beginning. Voila. In fact, that's what most of them do.
It's negligible, believe me. The judiciary is close to self-sustaining. More importantly, the need for or the cost of laws doesn't diminish depending on whether we use foreign oil or domestic ethanol.
the cost of the subsidies that the governments give to farmers
That's what this study includes.
cost of insurance agencies to protect the farm in case of tornados
Ha. Okay, if this exists, it's built into the price of the corn.
There will always be an energy cost (loss) involved in transforming energy from a lower state to a higher state.
Probably. But these studies don't typically take the energy input of the sun into account. We're not trying to conserve matter, here, just human effort and capital.
a) 50 mpg cars b) energy-efficient-everything c) 100 million acres devoted to ethanol/biodiesel d) lots of large wind farms e) cost-effective solar power f) coal
Obviously c) is the problem with this scenario. The farther we get from oil, the more things we find that can only be made cheaply from agricultural products. All of these things will begin to compete with food production, beginning with a shortage of fertilizers. (This is the real reason studies like these should be taken seriously; corn ethanol is seriously dependent on fertilizers made from oil.) Farmers are good at "using everything", but at some point it may come down to a choice between eating steaks, driving cars, or going nuclear.
Slashdot Mirror
Assume that you're either a) government official or b) the elderly.
What is the last thing you want to see? Of course, more mouths to feed. What do you want to see? Less mouths to feed.
Thus we have legal abortions, outlawed sex, encouraged violent games, needless ground wars that can't be won, ipso facto, et cetera, et cetera...
Most important:
5) Providing just enough competition to keep SBC et al on their toes...
Just a few years ago SBC was headed towards becoming the next AT&T. All it took was digital cell phones, VoIP, and a massive growth in cable internet to almost completely reverse the trend.
Now they probably think they can put the cable co.'s and whatever cell providers are left out of business by bundling, and quickly get back to business as usual. It's good to see that the cable co.'s at least can play ball.
In my area, cable internet is $25/mo, and I don't have to pay for a phone line or cable TV service. Not everyone wants or needs a land line.
No Start menu necessary! You just need to know the right options to rundll.
For instance, in Windows 98, it's:
C:\WINDOWS\RUNDLL32.EXE user,exitwindows
Google (along with a bit of experimentation) can help for other versions of Windows.
I was waiting for this comment. If I had mod points, you'd get them.
This is yet another brilliant mindfuck by Microsoft. It's nothing but win-win-win, all around.
The script-kiddie-MCSE's still think they are 133t as they hack around it. The mouth-breathing idiots will have to buy a legit copy. MS execs can say to their shareholders "see, we're trying to stop piracy." They can say to their critics "it's impossible to write secure software, so buy the new MS antivirus!" Less knowledgeable members of the OSS crowd will continue to underestimate the very real threat that hardware DRM poses.
Remember how that ex-military guy was all up in arms about video games a few years back? He was basically making the rounds on all the political talkshows saying that video games caused violence, and, oh yeah, he was a colonel or something. Did that seem strange to anybody else?
What if this whole dog and pony show is more nefarious? What if video games are channelling teenage aggression into outlets that cannot be harnessed and exploited by the military? What if kids these days would rather sit at home and shoot terrorists on their television than sign up to shoot dissidents in Iraq?
It's been known for a long time that football encourages the kind of violence and groupthink that is a useful precursor to military training. What if violent video games have the opposite effect? Would you expect our politicians to come out for or against them?
Where can I buy one?
You can buy one as soon as you come up with something to give the Chinese in return.
Preferably something that a) isn't a military secret, b) isn't an energy company, c) isn't US real estate, and definitely d) isn't just old chips to be recycled.
Big brother already knows more about you than you know about you.
So we've noticed. Big Brother knew that this guy was a terrorist. Of course, he didn't.
This is retribution and murder, not justice
Retribution and justice are not so different. Most generally held definitions of justice have long since absorbed the concept of retribution. While the word 'justice' may have originally meant something like 'goodness', the two departed thousands of years ago.
Even in the most enlightened societies, killing is generally held to be murder only when unjustified. Self-defense and capital punishment are both widely-accepted exceptions. Many would even add reasonable police action as an exception to murder. I doubt we'll ever see the bobbies who killed that person the other day on trial for murder.
In short, I'm not disagreeing with your assessment. But the dichotomy you assume between justice and retribution is demonstrably false. 'Justice' is yet another in a long list of words that have been hijacked and expanded by the doublespeak of the ages.
Great, racism.
Actually, it's called nationalism.
Racism, on the other hand, is what has prevented my country, twice in the last century, from letting other, more competent nations run rampant over your miserable, pompous little island.
So, forgive me if I don't give a shit what your views are on my country's laws.
As for privacy concerns, remember than thanks to CCTV on the London underground, one of yesterday's attempted suicide bombers was caught and shot dead.
Wow, don't you feel like a fucking idiot now? Now that, instead of killing a "potential terrorist" your asinine ideas have killed an innocent person? Do you think maybe it's best that you go back to that policy of prohibiting your dipshit cops from carrying weapons?
Isn't it frustrating that all your attempts to be a fucking man-of-action do-gooder dipshit end up causing more harm than good? Or does the outcome of your actions even register? Do you get a sick perverted pleasure from fucking up people's lives, even? Do you Brits need more mental hospitals over there or something?
The next time a US law is discussed on Slashdot, you Brits should just shut the fuck up and mind you own God damn business. You, personally, however, are getting an honored spot on my foes list for this and other recent trolls.
as he can close the software without having to worry about the lawyers coming round complaining about your code violating some obscure GPL snippet.
Sorry, but when you said "use" there I guess you really meant "close". Which is really more like "prevent others from using". Which is exactly what I was saying to begin with.
The GPL gives you freedom as long as you respect the freedom of others, ie. "the little guy".
it forces you to release software which doesn't even contain GPL code
This, of course, is complete bullshit. I can't even imagine how you could concoct such an idiocy. If you're not just trolling, why don't you tell us?
The reason you'll see just as many BSD fanatics as Linux nuts is for just the same reason: the license.
*BSD is a stable, secure OS with a proprietary-friendly, open source license. Linux is a stable, secure OS with a proprietary-hostile, open source license.
90% of the actual software that runs on the two is exactly the same. However, each has its own kernel and basic libraries.
the less free GPL's restrictions are meant to be benevolent for certain users.
Of course, you say the GPL is "benevolent" because it guarantees the freedom of the little guy. Freedom means nothing unless it's extended to the poorest among us.
The BSD brand of freedom is like the US before the civil-war. Freedom for a small group of capitalists. Freedom for those capable of enslaving others. The GPL, on the other hand, means freedom for everyone.
I'm assuming that your description of people who "want" to see your ads really means people who don't actually know they "want" to.
Do what the rest of the advertising world does, and reward people who look at your ads.
Depending on your target market, there are infinitely many ways to do this. If your "customer" lists really are "targeted", you should already know what would entice people to your "service".
You're right, this would be easy to get around. If you're not doing business in a state, I don't see how they can sue you except in federal court anyways.
Except telemarketers probably have POPs in each state (each area code even) to avoid long distance fees. Technically, they're doing business in every state. They just want it both ways.
Is it unstable on Windows or something? Seems stable as a rock on Linux.
it is based on the concept that a wife is property of her husband
No it isn't. It's equally valid for husbands who leave their wives. It's based on the concept of marriage as a contract, in the same way as the "tortious interference" claims we see here.
by HungWeiLo
blah, blah, getting into US schools is easy, blah, blah
Are you and your friends non-US citizens, per chance?
Distilleries have waste heat left over at the end. They need heat at the beginning. Just move this heat from the end to the beginning. Voila. In fact, that's what most of them do.
fighting for our frredom
I'm not going to touch this...
cost for the judicial branch to lay laws
It's negligible, believe me. The judiciary is close to self-sustaining. More importantly, the need for or the cost of laws doesn't diminish depending on whether we use foreign oil or domestic ethanol.
the cost of the subsidies that the governments give to farmers
That's what this study includes.
cost of insurance agencies to protect the farm in case of tornados
Ha. Okay, if this exists, it's built into the price of the corn.
There will always be an energy cost (loss) involved in transforming energy from a lower state to a higher state.
Probably. But these studies don't typically take the energy input of the sun into account. We're not trying to conserve matter, here, just human effort and capital.
I present the conservation/renewables scenario:
a) 50 mpg cars
b) energy-efficient-everything
c) 100 million acres devoted to ethanol/biodiesel
d) lots of large wind farms
e) cost-effective solar power
f) coal
Obviously c) is the problem with this scenario. The farther we get from oil, the more things we find that can only be made cheaply from agricultural products. All of these things will begin to compete with food production, beginning with a shortage of fertilizers. (This is the real reason studies like these should be taken seriously; corn ethanol is seriously dependent on fertilizers made from oil.) Farmers are good at "using everything", but at some point it may come down to a choice between eating steaks, driving cars, or going nuclear.
and raise you to 15% (by weight):
Ammonia
5. I say bring back the keyboard/CPU combo for small-footprint computing.
Keyboards are essentially disposable. CPUs aren't. In the non-IT-guy world, people treat computers like playschool toys.