However, there is a better system. It's called "Unanimity". There are various other words for it, such as "voluntary cooperation" and "individual responsibility".
Like "perfect communism", it may never be reached. Unlike "perfect communism", the method for bringing it about is not through greater and greater state control and power over everyones life.
It starts by the simple recognition that it is wrong to initiate force against other people. Think about that, and about how it is just as bad for 1 person to rob you as it is for 100 people to rob you even though they represent a "majority".
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. It's merely tyrany of the majority.
Yeah. Advocate the right of self defense to Feinswine in person? That would be interesting.
My being "part of the problem" is ignorance on your part. I didn't vote for them, I really don't care what their name is, and it wasn't worth the effort to look up for a slashdot message.
However, you do point out the one true and long-perfected way to actually get a politician to support your cause, whatever that may be:
First, no one I've ever voted for has won their election. That means I am taxed without representation.
My so-called "representitives" at the Federal level consist of Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinswine, and some party hack I can't even remember the name of. Oh, and "I never saw a power I didn't like" Bush, of course.
If you can tell me how any one of those will be swayed in the slightest by yet another heart felt, sincere letter opposing practically everything they have ever done, I would love to know how.
What I receive back are form letters that have nothing to do with the issues I addressed.
Please, refute me. Tell me how you convinced your "elected representitives" to change their actions. I'm really, really interested.
How might Microsofts NON-prosecution of such software as WinZip reflect on this case?
I've often read that in order to maintain a copyright, one must actively defend it. Of such things are MacDonald's "cease and desist" cases against restaurants in Scotland run by someone with the last name of MacDonald.
Such non-prosecution of a known commercial company using just such a partial name link-in can only damage their case in prosecuting someone else who only proposes to also use some letters to do the same thing.
I have to agree. Getting in trouble by copying Microsoft software? Talk about adding insult to injury!
The real treasure is the movies, though. Seriously, legal DVD's are not all that expensive, what's the draw? If the persecutors, I mean prosecutors, weren't using "list price" of the software to rack up the "multi-billion dollar pirate ring" charge, just how much "value" did these crooks steal anyway?
Just because taxes are theft doesn't make theft any less wrong.
However, I do agree with you that taxes would be better spent, if spent at all, prosecuting violent crimes.
If you believe your taxes are better spent catching software thieves, then donate to the BSA or whatever it's called. If you think it's better spent on violent crime, then send your money to someone who prosecutes violent crime. Or NORML, to convince the thugs to go after violent criminals instead of peaceful private drug users.
I would gladly donate to a fund that tracks down and prosecutes murderers, rapists and muggers, but I have no money left since my money has already been taken by some of the worst thieves I've ever seen. They wear badges.
You have the clout of being a "professional" with a track record. Clients have learned to trust you, and support you. This is a fantastic position to be in!
When you find such a MSWin-Only application, have you considered contacting the authors about porting it to a more reliable system than MSWin?
Why would a software company saddle themselves into having to support the "undocumented MSWin API of the week" if they believe they have a profitable choice in the matter?
We're in a closed loop. Specialized software is only offered on MSWin because the developers believe their clients want MSWin. Specialist clients are stuck using MSWin because it's the platform that the software they want to use is written for.
Killer Ap's drive OS adoption. People chose Mac's because they did graphics better. People chose MSWin because.... because.... oh heck, I'm sure there was something more than just the obvious upgrade path from DOS (right?).
The people who are now choosing Linux are doing exactly the same thing. "We" happen to be technically astute, or rebellious, or whatever, and accept the limitations of our choice as we revel in its accomplishments.
In closing, familiarity is what drives the mass market. No one is familiar at first. The first time I used a Mac, I couldn't make it work well regardless if its massively advertized "ease of use". It was totally un-intuitive just because I'd never used one before. Same with Solaris, Dos, TRS-80, Win3-2000, IBM MVS VM, HP 15C, etc, etc, etc, etc.... No one finds their two-wheeled bicycle is "intuitive" the very first time, either.
Yes, Apple's OSX may very well be all you say it is. And, having worked at Apple and knowing something about Apple developers, I fully expect you're right.
I look forward to the free ports and clones of OSX apps on Linux.
Hey, anyone whos real focus is graphics has always used Mac's. MS has been playing catchup in that market since the first Mac shipped. No one can argue with that.
"Linux", Windows, MacOS: Three converging technologies. Very interesting watching, but one has to have ones eyes open to notice.
While I have not had the pleasure of selling my Linux skills as such, I've worked in pleanty of Windows shops. I do networking, mostly wide area. Total reliability is what is asked of me, and it's what I expect out of a mission critical system.
When someone asks, I tell them to run anything that they want reliability from on Linux, because Linux systems are simply dead solid reliable.
For single user machines, I don't care what they want to run. I'll suggest Linux if they ask, but so far they want.DOC and Outlook. Fine, they pay someone else for that.
My systems run ipchains, FreeSwan. Boa, not Apachie, for the same reason I don't use Sendmail: too much power. I want something direct and simple, easy to lock down and dead solid reliable.
The "Desktop Battle" is won or lost on choice and familiarity. My first Linux box in 1996 had XF86 and OpenLook window manager. From day 1 I had a "Desktop". It just wasn't pretty, or familiar to anyone else.
The greatest gift anyone could give Microsoft would be to "punish Bill" by putting yet more Microsoft systems into schools. Oh No! Don't Throw Me Into That There Briar Patch!
How many of you Linux fanatics have given away computers this year to friends with kids, with Linux+KDE already installed? How many of you have offered to donate time to your local highschools to teach CS classes, Linux based (of course)?
Just some thoughts of how to win a "familiarity" war...
I have a Linux box which, had I not chosen to upgrade the kernel to 2.2.18 last September and thus reboot it, would also be on that list.
I guess I did the Linux geeks a disservice!
Please don't get me wrong, I am not knocking BSD, AIX or anything (except Win). I'm just crowing about Linux because it has been my experience and I prefer not to hype what I don't know.
The comment from LinuxWorks about the NSA producing a "secure Linux" is an interesting concept.
But how about the fact that the NSA's technique can be applied to embeded devices too? Not mentioned, only implied. Too bad, that makes a good argument point.
I would prefer it if the comment were slightly reworded, however.
The NSA has developed security techniques that provide a Linux platform even THEY can trust, that can be easily applied to embeded systems.
I also don't think they used enough, "Microsoft doesn't mention that the licensing they are objecting to is the way Microsoft licenses are written."
As E.S.Raymond mentioned, firearms are just one form of last resort in individual defense, and therefore don't have to be the latest and greatest. The government has tanks and laser guided bombs, anyway.
To paraphrase, "The gun, the picket line, the lawsuit. Each are the last resort. No one wants to go on strike, sue someone, or shoot an attacker, but real problems are happening when there is effort to take those options away."
Yes, accountants are extra conservative, in the practical sense. That's what they are paid for, after all.
However, reliability is the key. The simple reality of Linux' stability is a selling point beyond compare.
Add to that the fact that they could not care less what OS it runs on, so long as it is always available, and never looses data, and you have a perfect match in Linux and a journaling file system.
Beyond that, the OS itself doesn't buy you anything. It's the application that does the real work. Without trust in your app, nothing matters at all.
Sanbukid, your company already has programmers on staff, right? Then put this home-built package into OpenSource ASAP!
Your in-house guys are already going to be spending time debugging, so it's not like your company has anything to loose. If it's good, you get free testers every time someone decides to implement the system, providing feedback and making your own product better.
IBM and basic research, the Free Market in action
on
The Story Of GMR Heads
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Back in 1988 when I worked in an IBM mainframe shop, I had the good fortune to run accross one of their "technical newsletters", a publication of data from basic research efforts in various IBM labs around the world.
It's since been my "case in point" in any argument that there is no market for "basic research" and therefore government, taxes, theft, must be used in order to better the human condition.
Fulton, Bell, Edison, Tesla, and a host of for-profit universities all doing basic research not withstanding, some people just love using guns to force others to support their theory of "good".
IBM didn't keep their basic research secret then, and even with something as impossibly profitable as keeping GMR secret now might have been, the article notes that the highest density drive on the market isn't even made by IBM. They're not keeping it secret now, either.
Seriously, put something like a power supply fan at one corner of the rooms doorway. Experiment which is better, blowing in or out.
This little bit of active ventalation was learned from a friend who had a wood-stove. Just moving the air around a little bit was enough to establish currents that kept the entire house warm without a central blower, from one stove. And it wasn't a small house or one designed for wood heat.
You could put it in the door, to come on only when the door is shut, or however you want to do it.
Fans, fans fans. Might as well use a Tesla Turbine to move ungodly volumes of air with very little noise. No fan blades, no resonance with the heat sink blades to make loud whine or buzz. Just the hiss of moving air over the heat sink blades.
However, solid state heat transfer has been around for ages. I would love to find an advert for a 12-volt refridgerator for camping that I saw back in the 1970's. It used a pezo film between two heat sinks, one on the inside and one on the outside. Apply the voltage, and heat was moved actively into the outside heat sink, enough to chill your beer and keep the fish fresh on the trip home.
Put such a film between the chip and a heat sink. Gosh wow, a cool CPU.
Slashdot Mirror
However, there is a better system. It's called "Unanimity". There are various other words for it, such as "voluntary cooperation" and "individual responsibility".
Like "perfect communism", it may never be reached. Unlike "perfect communism", the method for bringing it about is not through greater and greater state control and power over everyones life.
It starts by the simple recognition that it is wrong to initiate force against other people. Think about that, and about how it is just as bad for 1 person to rob you as it is for 100 people to rob you even though they represent a "majority".
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. It's merely tyrany of the majority.
Bob-
Well said, bravo, so true, couldn't have said it better myself.
Bob-
Yeah. Advocate the right of self defense to Feinswine in person? That would be interesting.
My being "part of the problem" is ignorance on your part. I didn't vote for them, I really don't care what their name is, and it wasn't worth the effort to look up for a slashdot message.
However, you do point out the one true and long-perfected way to actually get a politician to support your cause, whatever that may be:
Buy them.
Bob-
First, no one I've ever voted for has won their election. That means I am taxed without representation.
My so-called "representitives" at the Federal level consist of Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinswine, and some party hack I can't even remember the name of. Oh, and "I never saw a power I didn't like" Bush, of course.
If you can tell me how any one of those will be swayed in the slightest by yet another heart felt, sincere letter opposing practically everything they have ever done, I would love to know how.
What I receive back are form letters that have nothing to do with the issues I addressed.
Please, refute me. Tell me how you convinced your "elected representitives" to change their actions. I'm really, really interested.
Bob-
It might confuse Microsoft windows users, true. That's not something I'd want to be arguing in court as a GoodThing(tm) however.
Just copy the successful use of "Win-" that is practiced by many to assure consumers that the product will run on Microsoft Windows.
WinLin
Bob-
How might Microsofts NON-prosecution of such software as WinZip reflect on this case?
I've often read that in order to maintain a copyright, one must actively defend it. Of such things are MacDonald's "cease and desist" cases against restaurants in Scotland run by someone with the last name of MacDonald.
Such non-prosecution of a known commercial company using just such a partial name link-in can only damage their case in prosecuting someone else who only proposes to also use some letters to do the same thing.
Thoughts?
Bob-
You to me a service by your eloquence. Yes, that was the point I was trying to make.
Bob-
Why steal photoshop when the Gimp exists?
I have to agree. Getting in trouble by copying Microsoft software? Talk about adding insult to injury!
The real treasure is the movies, though. Seriously, legal DVD's are not all that expensive, what's the draw? If the persecutors, I mean prosecutors, weren't using "list price" of the software to rack up the "multi-billion dollar pirate ring" charge, just how much "value" did these crooks steal anyway?
Bob-
Just because taxes are theft doesn't make theft any less wrong.
However, I do agree with you that taxes would be better spent, if spent at all, prosecuting violent crimes.
If you believe your taxes are better spent catching software thieves, then donate to the BSA or whatever it's called. If you think it's better spent on violent crime, then send your money to someone who prosecutes violent crime. Or NORML, to convince the thugs to go after violent criminals instead of peaceful private drug users.
I would gladly donate to a fund that tracks down and prosecutes murderers, rapists and muggers, but I have no money left since my money has already been taken by some of the worst thieves I've ever seen. They wear badges.
Bob-
Sweed, If I may make a suggestion.
You have the clout of being a "professional" with a track record. Clients have learned to trust you, and support you. This is a fantastic position to be in!
When you find such a MSWin-Only application, have you considered contacting the authors about porting it to a more reliable system than MSWin?
Why would a software company saddle themselves into having to support the "undocumented MSWin API of the week" if they believe they have a profitable choice in the matter?
We're in a closed loop. Specialized software is only offered on MSWin because the developers believe their clients want MSWin. Specialist clients are stuck using MSWin because it's the platform that the software they want to use is written for.
Killer Ap's drive OS adoption. People chose Mac's because they did graphics better. People chose MSWin because.... because.... oh heck, I'm sure there was something more than just the obvious upgrade path from DOS (right?).
The people who are now choosing Linux are doing exactly the same thing. "We" happen to be technically astute, or rebellious, or whatever, and accept the limitations of our choice as we revel in its accomplishments.
In closing, familiarity is what drives the mass market. No one is familiar at first. The first time I used a Mac, I couldn't make it work well regardless if its massively advertized "ease of use". It was totally un-intuitive just because I'd never used one before. Same with Solaris, Dos, TRS-80, Win3-2000, IBM MVS VM, HP 15C, etc, etc, etc, etc.... No one finds their two-wheeled bicycle is "intuitive" the very first time, either.
Bob-
Yes, Apple's OSX may very well be all you say it is. And, having worked at Apple and knowing something about Apple developers, I fully expect you're right.
I look forward to the free ports and clones of OSX apps on Linux.
Hey, anyone whos real focus is graphics has always used Mac's. MS has been playing catchup in that market since the first Mac shipped. No one can argue with that.
"Linux", Windows, MacOS: Three converging technologies. Very interesting watching, but one has to have ones eyes open to notice.
Bob-
The "standards" are waiting for you. Didn't you notice them?
Bob-
While I have not had the pleasure of selling my Linux skills as such, I've worked in pleanty of Windows shops. I do networking, mostly wide area. Total reliability is what is asked of me, and it's what I expect out of a mission critical system.
.DOC and Outlook. Fine, they pay someone else for that.
When someone asks, I tell them to run anything that they want reliability from on Linux, because Linux systems are simply dead solid reliable.
For single user machines, I don't care what they want to run. I'll suggest Linux if they ask, but so far they want
My systems run ipchains, FreeSwan. Boa, not Apachie, for the same reason I don't use Sendmail: too much power. I want something direct and simple, easy to lock down and dead solid reliable.
The "Desktop Battle" is won or lost on choice and familiarity. My first Linux box in 1996 had XF86 and OpenLook window manager. From day 1 I had a "Desktop". It just wasn't pretty, or familiar to anyone else.
The greatest gift anyone could give Microsoft would be to "punish Bill" by putting yet more Microsoft systems into schools. Oh No! Don't Throw Me Into That There Briar Patch!
How many of you Linux fanatics have given away computers this year to friends with kids, with Linux+KDE already installed? How many of you have offered to donate time to your local highschools to teach CS classes, Linux based (of course)?
Just some thoughts of how to win a "familiarity" war...
Bob-
If there aren't too many people who buy the Casio and later say "Doh!", having the Casio to compare too will make the Zaurus 5500 look really good.
Cheaper, runs Linux already, sold!
Bob-
I agree completely, BSD does hold the top spots.
I have a Linux box which, had I not chosen to upgrade the kernel to 2.2.18 last September and thus reboot it, would also be on that list.
I guess I did the Linux geeks a disservice!
Please don't get me wrong, I am not knocking BSD, AIX or anything (except Win). I'm just crowing about Linux because it has been my experience and I prefer not to hype what I don't know.
Bob-
The comment from LinuxWorks about the NSA producing a "secure Linux" is an interesting concept.
But how about the fact that the NSA's technique can be applied to embeded devices too? Not mentioned, only implied. Too bad, that makes a good argument point.
I would prefer it if the comment were slightly reworded, however.
The NSA has developed security techniques that provide a Linux platform even THEY can trust, that can be easily applied to embeded systems.
I also don't think they used enough, "Microsoft doesn't mention that the licensing they are objecting to is the way Microsoft licenses are written."
Bob-
Good coward, I said journaling, you bring up the straw-man of ext2 which is not journaling.
Silly Rabbi, kicks are for Treads.
Bob-
As E.S.Raymond mentioned, firearms are just one form of last resort in individual defense, and therefore don't have to be the latest and greatest. The government has tanks and laser guided bombs, anyway.
To paraphrase, "The gun, the picket line, the lawsuit. Each are the last resort. No one wants to go on strike, sue someone, or shoot an attacker, but real problems are happening when there is effort to take those options away."
Bob-
Yes, accountants are extra conservative, in the practical sense. That's what they are paid for, after all.
However, reliability is the key. The simple reality of Linux' stability is a selling point beyond compare.
Add to that the fact that they could not care less what OS it runs on, so long as it is always available, and never looses data, and you have a perfect match in Linux and a journaling file system.
Beyond that, the OS itself doesn't buy you anything. It's the application that does the real work. Without trust in your app, nothing matters at all.
Bob-
Sanbukid, your company already has programmers on staff, right? Then put this home-built package into OpenSource ASAP!
Your in-house guys are already going to be spending time debugging, so it's not like your company has anything to loose. If it's good, you get free testers every time someone decides to implement the system, providing feedback and making your own product better.
Eric S. Raymond mentions in his Homesteading the Noosphere, there is no value lost to your company, only benefit to be gained.
Bob-
Back in 1988 when I worked in an IBM mainframe shop, I had the good fortune to run accross one of their "technical newsletters", a publication of data from basic research efforts in various IBM labs around the world.
It's since been my "case in point" in any argument that there is no market for "basic research" and therefore government, taxes, theft, must be used in order to better the human condition.
Fulton, Bell, Edison, Tesla, and a host of for-profit universities all doing basic research not withstanding, some people just love using guns to force others to support their theory of "good".
IBM didn't keep their basic research secret then, and even with something as impossibly profitable as keeping GMR secret now might have been, the article notes that the highest density drive on the market isn't even made by IBM. They're not keeping it secret now, either.
Bravo.
Bob-
Ok, what brands of heat sinks use Peltier Junctions? Where can I buy one?
Bob-
Seriously, put something like a power supply fan at one corner of the rooms doorway. Experiment which is better, blowing in or out.
This little bit of active ventalation was learned from a friend who had a wood-stove. Just moving the air around a little bit was enough to establish currents that kept the entire house warm without a central blower, from one stove. And it wasn't a small house or one designed for wood heat.
You could put it in the door, to come on only when the door is shut, or however you want to do it.
Bob-
Fans, fans fans. Might as well use a Tesla Turbine to move ungodly volumes of air with very little noise. No fan blades, no resonance with the heat sink blades to make loud whine or buzz. Just the hiss of moving air over the heat sink blades.
However, solid state heat transfer has been around for ages. I would love to find an advert for a 12-volt refridgerator for camping that I saw back in the 1970's. It used a pezo film between two heat sinks, one on the inside and one on the outside. Apply the voltage, and heat was moved actively into the outside heat sink, enough to chill your beer and keep the fish fresh on the trip home.
Put such a film between the chip and a heat sink. Gosh wow, a cool CPU.
Bob-