RMS is one of the strongest people I have heard of. He stands firm, not even allowing an allusion to get past his quest for accuracy. When he corrected the interviewer, who said "free" but meant "gratis", I smiled and thought, "Way to go, Richard. Never let people get complacent."
That said, I disagree with him that all software must be libre. I don't like being told that I may not release my own work as I see fit. At the same time he is welcome to not use it as he sees fit.
So long as no one uses force to make you get on the spacecraft, why not?
People die climbing mountains, swimming rivers, racing cars. They also die in bed, old and feeble. Fact is, people die and nothing can stop it (yet).
So be polite and let people choose to risk their own lives if they want to. The only restriction I would place on it would be to demand full disclosure about any system I am interested in using.
But if you want to use "closed source" spaceflight, that's your choice to make.
I've tried jigdo three different times, and never had it work. The.ISOs would be created, but they failed to boot. Corrupted.
I'm glad to know from the other posters that torrents are available for Debian. I'll be serving Sarge when it goes "gold", just like I'm doing now for Knoppix.
Might as well use that DSL bandwidth for something useful!
Knoppix has been using BitTorrent for distribution for a while. I think it's an excellent example for other distributions.
Debian tried to use a distributed system where the packages for the.ISO were gathered from the mirror sites. I think BitTorrent would be a better way, and will suggest it.
While your sentiment is clear, your object choice does not lend itself to its use. The so-called "assault weapons" are not used by criminals. They're too heavy, too loud, cost too much. Just like bolt-action rifles. Also, 99% of firearms are never used in a crime.
It is a rare criminal that isn't wearing clothes. Clothes are the choice of criminals! We must make clothes illegal, or at least license them tightly, to prevent their abuse by criminals.
How about an automobile dealer instead? What if an automobile dealer found out that 99% of their cars were used to speed, run stop signs, tailgate? Show me a driver who never commits a "crime". Or rather, "infraction"?
Would they still be "justified" in selling cars?
I've never seen a car on the road with a US Government license plate that wasn't speeding. There's a big clue there about the difference between inanimate objects "used in crimes" and the people who commit crimes.
Once upon a time, the NRA received dues from me, it took only one major election cycle to notice that they are merely shills for the Republican and Democrat parties. Libertarians are, how can I put this politely..., a freaking thorn in their side. What's the one thing that would bankrupt the NRA? Actual enforcement of the Bill of Rights! Then the NRA would have to go back to being a marksmanship club. Boo Hoo!
So I went looking for a more focused rights-oriented, rather than money oriented, organization and found Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership who didn't care a bit about my Jewishness. Their _Grandpa Jack_ book series is excellent.
It's interesting to watch Sly's mouth say "Taco Bell" and hear him voice-over "Pizza Hut". Also, the Pizza Hut sign didn't quite fit into the scenes it is seen in. Just that little bit off that screams "FAKE!"
I wonder if the voice-over was included in his original contract? Hmmm..... Paid by the word?
The "Internet" consists mostly of privately funded networks connected together because they want to. So long as you can find a service provider, you're on. Offer a service, create a device, push or pull bits to your individual hearts content.
This is anarchy at its finest, voluntary cooperation of interested individuals. No one is forced to use HTTP, no law defines what ports are to be used for email. Some few governments have attempted to limit or force their idea of what data should be on their citizens (and others), but for the most part if it's known by humans it can be found.
Bureaucrats *HATE* that. The very idea that there is a realm of human activity that is unregulated, that does not have a law defining it, restricting it, making it mandatory or prohibited, drives them crazy.
The only reason that this particular bureaucrat wants "Internet" licenses is because he wants everything to be licensed. This is just what he happened to talk about today, tomorrow it will be something else.
It is unfortunate that police and military types listen to the bureaucrats, and beat up and kill citizens who try to ignore the bureaucrats. But then, that's what the bureaucrats hired the police and military to do.
you prefer a Roman-style privately owned fire department[?]
What I prefer is voluntary interaction. Robbing my neighbor to pay for a service that I want is criminal. Just because a "majority" does it doesn't make it any less criminal.
The fact that a larger pool of subscribers makes for cheaper individual contributions means that community fire departments are indeed cost effective. Funding by extortion is a relatively new phenomenon.
I lived in a small town 70 miles from the nearest hospital. There was an ambulance service, a "non-profit" subscription based team. People gladly displayed their "Smallville Rescue Squad subscriber" stickers on their cars. Part of the service was an air-evacuation helicopter that would be called if needed from the hospital.
Same for the local volunteer fire department.
If you didn't subscribe to the service, you could still call them and they would give you their prices. Just like a doctor if you don't subscribe to health insurance.
I subscribed because I knew their reputation: If someone needed help, they would act first and talk about money later. That is something I support, both morally and financially.
What I will not do is rob my neighbor at gun point to pay for it no matter how much I think they benefit.
You'll realize that a lot of the things you take for granted would not be possible without a well coordinated and well funded public effort.
That is a false statement. As I have aged, and learned, and interacted with people, I have realized that people get along just fine when allowed to act voluntarily.
There is a book on the subject you might wish to read, _The Voluntary City_, from the University of Michigan Press.
Today, even after government has robbed citizens of half their paychecks, and in turn raised the prices of all products by 50%, at least, to pay for the producers taxes, $Billions are contributed to voluntary charitable efforts from The Salvation Army to the Smallville Rescue Squad, Christian Children's Fund to so many churches that you cannot swing a cat without hitting one.
I don't know why you're making it about me.
Because YOU advocate robbing your neighbor at gun point for money to pay for things that YOU like.
One of the problems with taxation is that it insulates people like you from the repercussions of their choices. You think taxation is just fine, because it doesn't effect you very much. You think more good is done than bad, because you don't have to do the robbing. You have hired others to do the dirty work, who take a cut of the profits, so that YOU won't have to dirty your hands with it.
Why do I make it about you? Because it is about you. Grow up and accept responsibility for your choices.
"All political power flows from the barrel of a gun." --Mao Tse Tung
How right he was.
I accept the fact that human beings do not always make the best decisions concerning their own lives. I will not imprison them because they might choose badly, nor will I imprison them because they choose to live their life differently than I. I will not rob them "for their own good" no matter how "good" I think it would be for them.
those people we voted for try to work out what's best for our society.
Bureaucrats and politicians are just people, into whose hands you have given power. The examples of those bureaucrats and politicians doing what is best for THEM are endless, here and now and throughout history, and something I think you need to do some research about before you make another statement as naive as you have done in your post above.
It is called "Public Choice Theory". Very educational.
I've been reading the books online at mises.org, but some of them are just sooooo long.
If you haven't tried them yet, the audio (and video) files on mises.org are excellent. The variety of insights and topics means never getting bored. Great for commuting, especially if your CD player does MP3.
I can especially recommend the "targetted lecture" series, as well as the "Mises University" recordings.
A tax for "911" service also ignores any possibility for competition in 911 service providers.
Government is required for a true monopoly to exist, otherwise someone will come in and offer a better price/performance ratio. Governments *hate* it when someone tries to compete with them. Thus all the laws against it.:^)
The problem with your supposed "macroeconomic" model is that it ignores the cost of the taking.
Taxation requires bookkeeping, accounting, enforcement, prosecution, imprisonment. All these are costs ignored by the "macroeconomic" models.
Also ignored is competition. Why is there more than one fire insurance company? Because different people are served best in different ways. Imposing one-size-fits-all ensures that the people actually served is minimal.
What good is an emergency service with busy signals? What good is police "protection" with a 45 minute delay from call to response? Yet these complaints are repeated often.
Call for a pizza and the police, see who shows up faster. Why? Because the pizza delivery guy knows he has competition.
You go on to say, Of course, unnecessary taxes are outrageous, particularly when spent on pork spending bills.
This is hypocrisy, since I consider the 911 system to be pork, police to be far over-funded and unaccountable for their failures. Why are you not against these unnecessary taxes?
Because, simply put, you think they are necessary. Your priorities are not my priorities, yet you choose taxing me as a valid method of funding programs you think are important.
Like in parent and a child, sometimes you have to make people do what's best for them even though it's not what they seem to want.
Ah, Big Mommy style government. And who are you, A. Custard, to decide what is "best for them" and what isn't?
That would be the sin of pride on your part, that your judgement is right for everyone else.
So you couldn't stand to say "I told you so"? What are you doing about it, then? Setting up mutual fire protection insurance? Oh right, that's been done for centuries. Joining a volunteer fire department, maybe?
Your answer so far is to punish me, with taxation at gun point, because someone else might choose badly in your opinion. Hubris is a pale term for that attitude.
Charge for the service. Why is this so hard to grasp?
Why make it a "tax"? Why use force when subscription solves the problem?
Your VoIP provider links your dialing "911" to your local emergency response, where ever that may be. Remember that many VoIP providers will provide a POTS number for you in any area, regardless of where you physically are.
Your local emergency response service then charges a subscription fee for your use. Anyone who does not want to pay for the service can log the direct numbers for fire, police, or the emergency response center into their speed dial if they feel like it.
Blood money is a lousy way to pay for anything. If this is a a cause you think is "worthy", just make an extra payment into a "needy get the service free" fund. Much better than holding a gun to your neighbors head each month to rob them so you feel better.
Slashdot Mirror
RMS is one of the strongest people I have heard of. He stands firm, not even allowing an allusion to get past his quest for accuracy. When he corrected the interviewer, who said "free" but meant "gratis", I smiled and thought, "Way to go, Richard. Never let people get complacent."
That said, I disagree with him that all software must be libre. I don't like being told that I may not release my own work as I see fit. At the same time he is welcome to not use it as he sees fit.
Bob-
So long as no one uses force to make you get on the spacecraft, why not?
People die climbing mountains, swimming rivers, racing cars. They also die in bed, old and feeble. Fact is, people die and nothing can stop it (yet).
So be polite and let people choose to risk their own lives if they want to. The only restriction I would place on it would be to demand full disclosure about any system I am interested in using.
But if you want to use "closed source" spaceflight, that's your choice to make.
Bob-
The more participants in the fray, the better. May the fit survive and the fittest flourish!
& mode=classic
As anyone who has watched Open Source software development can attest, the wider field of ideas tried yields the best results.
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20041024
Bob-
I've tried jigdo three different times, and never had it work. The .ISOs would be created, but they failed to boot. Corrupted.
I'm glad to know from the other posters that torrents are available for Debian. I'll be serving Sarge when it goes "gold", just like I'm doing now for Knoppix.
Might as well use that DSL bandwidth for something useful!
Bob-
I read through the replies and noticed very, very few people were posting the URLs of "legitimate use" site.
The more people that know about a Torrent, the faster the torrent becomes. So post those URLs!
Bob-
Bravo.
100 times more often, a firearm is used to protect life. To foil crime. To defend.
P2P isn't doing much of that, either.
Bob-
http://torrent.unix-ag.uni-kl.de:6969/
Knoppix, at least, does so.
Bob-
http://torrent.unix-ag.uni-kl.de:6969/
.ISO were gathered from the mirror sites. I think BitTorrent would be a better way, and will suggest it.
Knoppix has been using BitTorrent for distribution for a while. I think it's an excellent example for other distributions.
Debian tried to use a distributed system where the packages for the
Bob-
While your sentiment is clear, your object choice does not lend itself to its use. The so-called "assault weapons" are not used by criminals. They're too heavy, too loud, cost too much. Just like bolt-action rifles. Also, 99% of firearms are never used in a crime.
It is a rare criminal that isn't wearing clothes. Clothes are the choice of criminals! We must make clothes illegal, or at least license them tightly, to prevent their abuse by criminals.
How about an automobile dealer instead? What if an automobile dealer found out that 99% of their cars were used to speed, run stop signs, tailgate? Show me a driver who never commits a "crime". Or rather, "infraction"?
Would they still be "justified" in selling cars?
I've never seen a car on the road with a US Government license plate that wasn't speeding. There's a big clue there about the difference between inanimate objects "used in crimes" and the people who commit crimes.
Bob-
Once upon a time, the NRA received dues from me, it took only one major election cycle to notice that they are merely shills for the Republican and Democrat parties. Libertarians are, how can I put this politely..., a freaking thorn in their side. What's the one thing that would bankrupt the NRA? Actual enforcement of the Bill of Rights! Then the NRA would have to go back to being a marksmanship club. Boo Hoo!
So I went looking for a more focused rights-oriented, rather than money oriented, organization and found Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership who didn't care a bit about my Jewishness. Their _Grandpa Jack_ book series is excellent.
And, of course, money to Debian for the best Linux distribution on earth.
Bob-
It's interesting to watch Sly's mouth say "Taco Bell" and hear him voice-over "Pizza Hut". Also, the Pizza Hut sign didn't quite fit into the scenes it is seen in. Just that little bit off that screams "FAKE!"
I wonder if the voice-over was included in his original contract? Hmmm..... Paid by the word?
Bob-
I think _Demolition Man_ made the best use of the paid commercial.
"Hey, I like Mexican food and all, but 'Dinner and dancing a Taco Bell'??"
"Taco Bell won the franchise wars. Now all restaurants are Taco Bell."
Or if James Bond is more your style,
"Here is your new BMW 310i, double-oh-7. Do try to bring this one back intact?"
The "Internet" consists mostly of privately funded networks connected together because they want to. So long as you can find a service provider, you're on. Offer a service, create a device, push or pull bits to your individual hearts content.
This is anarchy at its finest, voluntary cooperation of interested individuals. No one is forced to use HTTP, no law defines what ports are to be used for email. Some few governments have attempted to limit or force their idea of what data should be on their citizens (and others), but for the most part if it's known by humans it can be found.
Bureaucrats *HATE* that. The very idea that there is a realm of human activity that is unregulated, that does not have a law defining it, restricting it, making it mandatory or prohibited, drives them crazy.
The only reason that this particular bureaucrat wants "Internet" licenses is because he wants everything to be licensed. This is just what he happened to talk about today, tomorrow it will be something else.
It is unfortunate that police and military types listen to the bureaucrats, and beat up and kill citizens who try to ignore the bureaucrats. But then, that's what the bureaucrats hired the police and military to do.
Bob-
The players made the game. All the books in the world cannot take the place of the imagination of the players.
I agree with the reviewer, a "tribute" without Gygax is absurd.
Bob-
Yeah, that's called taxation.
"Give me a percentage of your sallary, and I won't put you in jail."
The ones with the biggest guns are called "government", the smaller ones are called "organized crime".
Same methods, same results. Often, same services.
Bob-
you prefer a Roman-style privately owned fire department[?]
What I prefer is voluntary interaction. Robbing my neighbor to pay for a service that I want is criminal. Just because a "majority" does it doesn't make it any less criminal.
The fact that a larger pool of subscribers makes for cheaper individual contributions means that community fire departments are indeed cost effective. Funding by extortion is a relatively new phenomenon.
I lived in a small town 70 miles from the nearest hospital. There was an ambulance service, a "non-profit" subscription based team. People gladly displayed their "Smallville Rescue Squad subscriber" stickers on their cars. Part of the service was an air-evacuation helicopter that would be called if needed from the hospital.
Same for the local volunteer fire department.
If you didn't subscribe to the service, you could still call them and they would give you their prices. Just like a doctor if you don't subscribe to health insurance.
I subscribed because I knew their reputation: If someone needed help, they would act first and talk about money later. That is something I support, both morally and financially.
What I will not do is rob my neighbor at gun point to pay for it no matter how much I think they benefit.
You'll realize that a lot of the things you take for granted would not be possible without a well coordinated and well funded public effort.
That is a false statement. As I have aged, and learned, and interacted with people, I have realized that people get along just fine when allowed to act voluntarily.
There is a book on the subject you might wish to read, _The Voluntary City_, from the University of Michigan Press.
Today, even after government has robbed citizens of half their paychecks, and in turn raised the prices of all products by 50%, at least, to pay for the producers taxes, $Billions are contributed to voluntary charitable efforts from The Salvation Army to the Smallville Rescue Squad, Christian Children's Fund to so many churches that you cannot swing a cat without hitting one.
I don't know why you're making it about me.
Because YOU advocate robbing your neighbor at gun point for money to pay for things that YOU like.
One of the problems with taxation is that it insulates people like you from the repercussions of their choices. You think taxation is just fine, because it doesn't effect you very much. You think more good is done than bad, because you don't have to do the robbing. You have hired others to do the dirty work, who take a cut of the profits, so that YOU won't have to dirty your hands with it.
Why do I make it about you? Because it is about you. Grow up and accept responsibility for your choices.
"All political power flows from the barrel of a gun." --Mao Tse Tung
How right he was.
I accept the fact that human beings do not always make the best decisions concerning their own lives. I will not imprison them because they might choose badly, nor will I imprison them because they choose to live their life differently than I. I will not rob them "for their own good" no matter how "good" I think it would be for them.
those people we voted for try to work out what's best for our society.
Bureaucrats and politicians are just people, into whose hands you have given power. The examples of those bureaucrats and politicians doing what is best for THEM are endless, here and now and throughout history, and something I think you need to do some research about before you make another statement as naive as you have done in your post above.
It is called "Public Choice Theory". Very educational.
Bob-
I've been reading the books online at mises.org, but some of them are just sooooo long.
If you haven't tried them yet, the audio (and video) files on mises.org are excellent. The variety of insights and topics means never getting bored. Great for commuting, especially if your CD player does MP3.
I can especially recommend the "targetted lecture" series, as well as the "Mises University" recordings.
Bob-
A tax for "911" service also ignores any possibility for competition in 911 service providers.
:^)
Government is required for a true monopoly to exist, otherwise someone will come in and offer a better price/performance ratio. Governments *hate* it when someone tries to compete with them. Thus all the laws against it.
Bob-
Very well said. Have you read any Mises or Rothbard?
The problem with your supposed "macroeconomic" model is that it ignores the cost of the taking.
Taxation requires bookkeeping, accounting, enforcement, prosecution, imprisonment. All these are costs ignored by the "macroeconomic" models.
Also ignored is competition. Why is there more than one fire insurance company? Because different people are served best in different ways. Imposing one-size-fits-all ensures that the people actually served is minimal.
What good is an emergency service with busy signals? What good is police "protection" with a 45 minute delay from call to response? Yet these complaints are repeated often.
Call for a pizza and the police, see who shows up faster. Why? Because the pizza delivery guy knows he has competition.
You go on to say, Of course, unnecessary taxes are outrageous, particularly when spent on pork spending bills.
This is hypocrisy, since I consider the 911 system to be pork, police to be far over-funded and unaccountable for their failures. Why are you not against these unnecessary taxes?
Because, simply put, you think they are necessary. Your priorities are not my priorities, yet you choose taxing me as a valid method of funding programs you think are important.
That is theft.
Bob-
Like in parent and a child, sometimes you have to make people do what's best for them even though it's not what they seem to want.
Ah, Big Mommy style government. And who are you, A. Custard, to decide what is "best for them" and what isn't?
That would be the sin of pride on your part, that your judgement is right for everyone else.
So you couldn't stand to say "I told you so"? What are you doing about it, then? Setting up mutual fire protection insurance? Oh right, that's been done for centuries. Joining a volunteer fire department, maybe?
Your answer so far is to punish me, with taxation at gun point, because someone else might choose badly in your opinion. Hubris is a pale term for that attitude.
Bob-
Charge for the service. Why is this so hard to grasp?
Why make it a "tax"? Why use force when subscription solves the problem?
Your VoIP provider links your dialing "911" to your local emergency response, where ever that may be. Remember that many VoIP providers will provide a POTS number for you in any area, regardless of where you physically are.
Your local emergency response service then charges a subscription fee for your use. Anyone who does not want to pay for the service can log the direct numbers for fire, police, or the emergency response center into their speed dial if they feel like it.
Blood money is a lousy way to pay for anything. If this is a a cause you think is "worthy", just make an extra payment into a "needy get the service free" fund. Much better than holding a gun to your neighbors head each month to rob them so you feel better.
Bob-
Get sequestered for a year, then tell me how good you feel about the prosecution.
It's easy to criticize someone else for not doing what you think you would do.
Bob-
Actually, most libertarians consider themselves much more like Spartans at Thermopoli.
A losing battle against Leviathan, but one that must be fought or else the whole world is doomed to ignorance and tyranny.