I, as a free individual, should have the right to negotiate with a corporation as with another individual, free from any restriction or harassment by something like a union.
It's no more "restriction" or "harassment" for an agreement to exist between a union and an employer, than it is for an agreement to exist between two people.
If I negotiate a deal for you to be my sole supplier of widgets, because you won't provide me with any unless I agree to your terms, that's a freely made contract.
If I negotiate a deal for a union to be to my its sole supplier of labor, because they'll use strikes and pickets against me unless I agree to their terms, that's also a freely made contract.
It also assumes that I, as a free individual, am too stupid and un-resourceful to go out and make my own fortune, regardless of corporations.
An intelligent free individual realizes that some degree of voluntary co-operation and group action is useful in obtaining his or her goals.
This is a non-issue however, because most sane people that run good email servers do not allow smtp pre-delivery forwarding to take place at all
Not at all. ISPs generally allow customers to send outgoing mail through the ISP server as a relay. This is very common and has nothing to do with open relaying, as it's only permitting relaying from the customer's IPs.
If they spent time and resources coming up with such a superior idea, why SHOULDN'T they be allowed to patent it and reap the rewards?
Because
software - which is an expression of mathematical algorithms - is not legitimately patentable
because patents can only be legitimately issued for genuine innovations, things that are non-obvious and have no prior art
because the purpose of patentsis not to allow inventors to use state power to create a monopoly so they can "reap the rewards", but rather "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts"
actually scientists state what they know, usually accompanied by how they know it, and how anyone can test the theory
Well, that's if they're following the scientific method. Scientists are human, and are just as prone to being stuck in a certain mindset as the rest of us; this is why it's been observed that new ideas in science more often gain ground by the "old guard" dying off than by being "converted" to the new theory.
Consider the resistance to Einstein's relativity theory - and how Einstein himself never accepted the randomness of quantum mechanics.
"A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to kill a family member or a friend than it is to be used against an intruder"
The accuracy of this statistic is highly questionable, but more important, this argument doesn't address the fact that most violence happens between people who are aquainted.
That can be a domestic dispute, or it can be two crack dealers arguing over the profits of their operation, but they both go under the statistics for "victim knew the assailant".
Now, if you think your wife might snap some day and shoot you, yes, you shouldn't have a gun in the house. Or sharp objects, for that matter. In fact, getting rid of the wife might be a good idea.
But you are very unlikely to be shot by a family member or friend by accident. You are more likely to die by fire or by drowning than by an accidental shooting.
Most all semi-automatic assault weapons and even some non-assault weapons were banned in 1994.
First we need to get some terms straight. "Assault weapon" basically means "ugly semiautomatic rifle"; it is not a meaningful term of art. "Assault rifle" means a rifle of medium power capable of automatic fire, usually can selected for semiautomatic or automatic operation; classic examples are the AK-47, M-16, and the M4 Carbine.
(They are distinct from submachine guns such as the Uzi or MAC-10, which use much lower powered pistol ammunition.)
Assault rifles have been, and still are, heavily regulated.
Certain ugly guns were banned in 1994 - guns with certain cosmetic features like bayonett lugs or folding stocks. Other semiautomatic rifles with the exact same mechanism remained legal.
A very small percentage of crimes were ever committed with semiautomatic rifles. But posing with ugly guns that were "taken off the streets" was an excellent political photo op.
The "assault weapon" ban was a bad law, and deserves to be left to die.
Shoot your local politicians and establish anarchy.
If only it were that easy.
If every politician, every vestage of the state, disappeared overnight, what would your neighbors do? Either they'd all get together and elect new a new, somewhat representative, government right away; or the biggest, baddest, best-armed among them (or someone clever enough to get the biggest, baddest, etcetera, to work for them) would take over and rule warlord-style.
Anarchy is unstable, because right now human beings aren't ready for it.
As Kerry Thornley put it in Zenarchy,
"Universal Enlightenment a prerequisite to abolition of the State, after which the State will inevitably vanish. Or - that failing - nobody will give a damn."
.. as long as you agree Corporations booting out unions is also part of a free market.
The very existence of corporations is a state intervention.
If a bunch of people want to form a business, and draw up some contracts to that effect, all well and good. But creating an artifical immortal legal "person" with all the rights but few of the responsibilities of genuine humans, that shields the partners from liability for their actions? That's a huge intervention in the marketplace. It's just one that's been around so long we don't even notice its presence.
Or, you could say that it ensures that the workers aren't saddled with union dues, mandatory work stoppages, or the other things that unions require. Negotiating the terms of my employment is *my* right...I'd rather have a choice in how I do it.
And negotiating their terms with management - including an agreement to only hire union members - is the union's right.
Unions negotiating the best tersm for their members is just as much a part of a free market as businesses banding together to negotiate favorable terms with suppliers.
What if I just want to be able to play some a DVD? Am I supposed to magically know that I need "libdvdcss" and "mplayer"?
Um, Google? "Linux dvd player software".
And how is this any different for other platforms? "What if I just want to able to make spreadsheets? Am I supposed to magically know that I need to go buy "Microsoft Excel"?
Why can't I get a Redhat RPM and install it on, let's say, a Slackware machine without any additional work?
For the same reason you can't get a Toyota Tercel engine and expect to put it in a Toyota Celica, or even follow the exact same procedures to change the oil. "But they're both Toyotas!"
Any book which makes an assertation about "the American school system" is off the mark from the start. School systems are run locally.
In my area, if I cross the line between Baltimore City and Baltimore County, I see one system where most public schools are failing and one where things are generally ok.
(My bias: I spent K-12 in Baltimore County schools, which gave me a sound enough education to make me a National Merit Scholar and send me off to college with almost a full semister's worth of AP credits. Of couse, this was in the late 80's, and things have probably changed since then, but the impression I get from the kids I work with now is still of generally adequate schools.)
Depends on what you mean by "backed". Their value comes from the work you already performed, so their issuance is limited...in that respect, they're more "backed" than current U.S. currency.
Is not it a kind of a socialist (and further left) response to the Liberty Dollars?
No, not a "response" since local currencies like timedollars have been around long before the "Liberty Dollar". In fact the Liberty Dollar, so far as I can tell from their website, only goes back to 1998, whereas Itaca Hours have been around since 1991, Berkshares since 1993, and Timedollars
since 1995.
Are they socialist? Sure, if it's properly understood that socialism is an economic system based on the exchange of labor. (Whereas capitalism is based on the (necessarily state-backed) ownership of resources.) They're a great example of libertarian socialism in action.
Let's see, every time me and my wife spend a nice hour in bed we write a Time Dollar IOU to each other for services provided... HUH???
Timedollars are issued by an exchange. If you and your wife (and any other consenting adults you choose to include) form your own exchange and issue credit to each other based on sexual acts, hey, go for it. SexBucks! (And let's face it, a lot of relationships work this way under informal understanding...)
Whether the democrats like it or not the majority of military is behind their Command-In-Chief and will in all likelyhood vote for him again.
Actually I've discussed the question with a few military people, and none planned to vote for Bush. Indeed, one Army officer pointed out to me that, given the "backdoor draft" going on, members of the Guard and Reserves "would be idiots" (his words) to vote for Bush. (Of course, I live in a pretty solid "blue" state.)
I can also tell you first hand, that if your knowledge of the events in Afghanistan and Iraq is from the news media then you are basically ignorant of reality. The vast majority of the Iraqs' and Afghanistans' citizens are very glad the US stepped in and helped...Someday the true events will be revealed and you guy's will be amazed at how totally clueless you were.
Right, I'm going to take the word of an Anonymous Coward on this. As if all the bombing and shooting was actually just an old Iraqi way of greating visitors.
That's like saying, I don't mind being on camera at the store, as long as they don't see me steal......
No, it's pointing out that exceeding the speed liit and driving unsafely are often unrelated.
80 mph on a traffic-free straight highway in good weather in daylight is safer than 55 mph on a crowded sleet-covered twisty road at night, yet it's the former that could get me a ticket.
to prevent people from using the data connection as a modem for they're laptops. Why this is, is beyond me. As they charge an arm and a leg for data transfers.
You can use your Verizon phone as a modem, and calls are charged just like any other usage. No extra fees for data transfers. (It's not at all clear from their website, I had to go to a store and get a salescritter to explain it to me.) They do have a higher-speed, more-expensive data service available, but for checking mail and lite surfing, it's ok - even an ssh session is possible.
And, even if it had been offered, we wouldn't have taken it.
Right. We don't take charity, dammit. We're too proud for that.
We get what we need the old fashioned way: force. We invade outright, take the land or the oil or the minerals we want; or use overt and covert means to put "friendly" leaders in power who give us what we want.
Re:All I need is a great sub-notebook
on
Palmtop Nirvana?
·
· Score: 1
No larger than 12", no heavier than 5.5 lbs...Linux compatible for 99% of the hardware...I've found only one laptop that even comes close to what I want, and that's the Vaio S-series. I just don't want to buy a Sony computer
I got my Vaio from EmperorLinux; been pretty happy with it. They currently have 6 laptops under 5 pounds, with Linux pre-installed; some are Sony, but also Sharp, Dell, and IBM.
Whether it's okay for AKMA (whoever he is) to make such use of the facility would seem to be entirely dependent on the library's acceptable-use policy.
If you send radio waves my way, I'm free to do as I please with them. If I sent radio waves your way, what you do with them is your choice.
If you want your wifi service to only be used in a certain area, it's up to you to use some mechanism to enforce that (at the lowest level, radio-opaque shielding; at a higher level, software mechanisms to make users register after agreeing to some terms). If you leave it open, it's an open invitation.
This is a ridiculous as threatening someone with arrest for reading by the light coming out of the window...(and now reading TFA, I see AKMA making the same comparison).
In essence, in fact, Anne no longer has control of her program. The GPL has infected it, and she can't benefit from any of the contributions that people are making any more.
No. Anne still has control over her program.
What Bob creates is a derivative work of Anne's program, but is a distinct work.
You're suggesting that Anne should have some control over Bob's program. But that is in essence the distinction between the BSD and GPL licences; the GPL affects derivative works, BSD does not.
And of course she can benefit. She's completely free to use Bob's program, and to make changes to it. The only restriction is that if she distributes copies of Bob's program, she has to make source available.
I was introduced to gaffer's tape by a theater geek. This stuff makes ordinary tape look like tissue paper.
Yep, gaff tape is what duct tape was supposed to be. It tears easily cross-wise but is quite durable, sticks strongly but doesn't leave a residue behind.
I've found that De-Solv-It citrus adhesive remover works miracles, and it doesn't even irritate the skin.
Citrus degreasers will eat some plastics. Use in low concentrtion and follow with a water-dampened cloth to remove any traces, though, and you're pretty safe.
True, however it also means that I can't design a better front end for it - I'm stuck with whatever is released along with the library.
Depends. I'm not familiar with the program in question, but in general, if the front end is a separate process or communicates with the back end in such a way that they are separate works, and your creation is not a derivative work, then you can licence as you please.
Unfortunately, the question of "what is a derivative work" is not an easy one to answer. (Not the FSF's fault - it's a tricky legal point even with books, much less something as relatively new to the legal word as software.)
Nope, the GPL is viral only if you let it be.
The GPL is never viral. It does not infect unrelated code. If you want a genetic metaphor, it's more like a dominant gene - it only affects descendants.
The GPL doesn't go around infecting other code. It's not contageous, other unrelated code doesn't suddenly become GPLed. Only derivative works are affected.
If you want a genetic metaphor, it's more like a dominant gene - a "child" (derivative work) of a GPLed work must also be GPLed.
Of course, unlike a dominant gene, all the descendants of the child will necessarily have it too. But it's still a better metaphor than "viral".
Slashdot Mirror
It's no more "restriction" or "harassment" for an agreement to exist between a union and an employer, than it is for an agreement to exist between two people.
If I negotiate a deal for you to be my sole supplier of widgets, because you won't provide me with any unless I agree to your terms, that's a freely made contract.
If I negotiate a deal for a union to be to my its sole supplier of labor, because they'll use strikes and pickets against me unless I agree to their terms, that's also a freely made contract.
An intelligent free individual realizes that some degree of voluntary co-operation and group action is useful in obtaining his or her goals.
Not at all. ISPs generally allow customers to send outgoing mail through the ISP server as a relay. This is very common and has nothing to do with open relaying, as it's only permitting relaying from the customer's IPs.
Because
Well, that's if they're following the scientific method. Scientists are human, and are just as prone to being stuck in a certain mindset as the rest of us; this is why it's been observed that new ideas in science more often gain ground by the "old guard" dying off than by being "converted" to the new theory.
Consider the resistance to Einstein's relativity theory - and how Einstein himself never accepted the randomness of quantum mechanics.
The accuracy of this statistic is highly questionable, but more important, this argument doesn't address the fact that most violence happens between people who are aquainted. That can be a domestic dispute, or it can be two crack dealers arguing over the profits of their operation, but they both go under the statistics for "victim knew the assailant".
Now, if you think your wife might snap some day and shoot you, yes, you shouldn't have a gun in the house. Or sharp objects, for that matter. In fact, getting rid of the wife might be a good idea.
But you are very unlikely to be shot by a family member or friend by accident. You are more likely to die by fire or by drowning than by an accidental shooting.
(They are distinct from submachine guns such as the Uzi or MAC-10, which use much lower powered pistol ammunition.)
Assault rifles have been, and still are, heavily regulated.
Certain ugly guns were banned in 1994 - guns with certain cosmetic features like bayonett lugs or folding stocks. Other semiautomatic rifles with the exact same mechanism remained legal.
A very small percentage of crimes were ever committed with semiautomatic rifles. But posing with ugly guns that were "taken off the streets" was an excellent political photo op.
The "assault weapon" ban was a bad law, and deserves to be left to die.
If only it were that easy.
If every politician, every vestage of the state, disappeared overnight, what would your neighbors do? Either they'd all get together and elect new a new, somewhat representative, government right away; or the biggest, baddest, best-armed among them (or someone clever enough to get the biggest, baddest, etcetera, to work for them) would take over and rule warlord-style.
Anarchy is unstable, because right now human beings aren't ready for it.
As Kerry Thornley put it in Zenarchy, "Universal Enlightenment a prerequisite to abolition of the State, after which the State will inevitably vanish. Or - that failing - nobody will give a damn."
The very existence of corporations is a state intervention.
If a bunch of people want to form a business, and draw up some contracts to that effect, all well and good. But creating an artifical immortal legal "person" with all the rights but few of the responsibilities of genuine humans, that shields the partners from liability for their actions? That's a huge intervention in the marketplace. It's just one that's been around so long we don't even notice its presence.
And negotiating their terms with management - including an agreement to only hire union members - is the union's right.
Unions negotiating the best tersm for their members is just as much a part of a free market as businesses banding together to negotiate favorable terms with suppliers.
Um, Google? "Linux dvd player software".
And how is this any different for other platforms? "What if I just want to able to make spreadsheets? Am I supposed to magically know that I need to go buy "Microsoft Excel"?
For the same reason you can't get a Toyota Tercel engine and expect to put it in a Toyota Celica, or even follow the exact same procedures to change the oil. "But they're both Toyotas!"
Any book which makes an assertation about "the American school system" is off the mark from the start. School systems are run locally.
In my area, if I cross the line between Baltimore City and Baltimore County, I see one system where most public schools are failing and one where things are generally ok.
(My bias: I spent K-12 in Baltimore County schools, which gave me a sound enough education to make me a National Merit Scholar and send me off to college with almost a full semister's worth of AP credits. Of couse, this was in the late 80's, and things have probably changed since then, but the impression I get from the kids I work with now is still of generally adequate schools.)
Not trying - doing. Some of these systems have been working for over a decade.
Uh, no. Just the opposite, in fact, it's recognizing value that is currently undercounted.
Yes: because it suits the bankers, allowing them to parasitically accumulate wealth.
Depends on what you mean by "backed". Their value comes from the work you already performed, so their issuance is limited...in that respect, they're more "backed" than current U.S. currency.
No, not a "response" since local currencies like timedollars have been around long before the "Liberty Dollar". In fact the Liberty Dollar, so far as I can tell from their website, only goes back to 1998, whereas Itaca Hours have been around since 1991, Berkshares since 1993, and Timedollars since 1995.
Are they socialist? Sure, if it's properly understood that socialism is an economic system based on the exchange of labor. (Whereas capitalism is based on the (necessarily state-backed) ownership of resources.) They're a great example of libertarian socialism in action.
Timedollars are issued by an exchange. If you and your wife (and any other consenting adults you choose to include) form your own exchange and issue credit to each other based on sexual acts, hey, go for it. SexBucks! (And let's face it, a lot of relationships work this way under informal understanding...)
Market forces, of course. "I'll trade you six Ithaca Hours for three timedollars". You can take it, leave it, or make a counteroffer.
Actually I've discussed the question with a few military people, and none planned to vote for Bush. Indeed, one Army officer pointed out to me that, given the "backdoor draft" going on, members of the Guard and Reserves "would be idiots" (his words) to vote for Bush. (Of course, I live in a pretty solid "blue" state.)
Right, I'm going to take the word of an Anonymous Coward on this. As if all the bombing and shooting was actually just an old Iraqi way of greating visitors.
No, it's pointing out that exceeding the speed liit and driving unsafely are often unrelated.
80 mph on a traffic-free straight highway in good weather in daylight is safer than 55 mph on a crowded sleet-covered twisty road at night, yet it's the former that could get me a ticket.
Ideally, we need dynamic speed limits...
You can use your Verizon phone as a modem, and calls are charged just like any other usage. No extra fees for data transfers. (It's not at all clear from their website, I had to go to a store and get a salescritter to explain it to me.) They do have a higher-speed, more-expensive data service available, but for checking mail and lite surfing, it's ok - even an ssh session is possible.
Right. We don't take charity, dammit. We're too proud for that.
We get what we need the old fashioned way: force. We invade outright, take the land or the oil or the minerals we want; or use overt and covert means to put "friendly" leaders in power who give us what we want.
I got my Vaio from EmperorLinux; been pretty happy with it. They currently have 6 laptops under 5 pounds, with Linux pre-installed; some are Sony, but also Sharp, Dell, and IBM.
If you send radio waves my way, I'm free to do as I please with them. If I sent radio waves your way, what you do with them is your choice.
If you want your wifi service to only be used in a certain area, it's up to you to use some mechanism to enforce that (at the lowest level, radio-opaque shielding; at a higher level, software mechanisms to make users register after agreeing to some terms). If you leave it open, it's an open invitation.
This is a ridiculous as threatening someone with arrest for reading by the light coming out of the window...(and now reading TFA, I see AKMA making the same comparison).
No. Anne still has control over her program.
What Bob creates is a derivative work of Anne's program, but is a distinct work.
You're suggesting that Anne should have some control over Bob's program. But that is in essence the distinction between the BSD and GPL licences; the GPL affects derivative works, BSD does not.
And of course she can benefit. She's completely free to use Bob's program, and to make changes to it. The only restriction is that if she distributes copies of Bob's program, she has to make source available.
Yep, gaff tape is what duct tape was supposed to be. It tears easily cross-wise but is quite durable, sticks strongly but doesn't leave a residue behind.
Citrus degreasers will eat some plastics. Use in low concentrtion and follow with a water-dampened cloth to remove any traces, though, and you're pretty safe.
Depends. I'm not familiar with the program in question, but in general, if the front end is a separate process or communicates with the back end in such a way that they are separate works, and your creation is not a derivative work, then you can licence as you please.
Unfortunately, the question of "what is a derivative work" is not an easy one to answer. (Not the FSF's fault - it's a tricky legal point even with books, much less something as relatively new to the legal word as software.)
The GPL is never viral. It does not infect unrelated code. If you want a genetic metaphor, it's more like a dominant gene - it only affects descendants.
Except it's not.
The GPL doesn't go around infecting other code. It's not contageous, other unrelated code doesn't suddenly become GPLed. Only derivative works are affected.
If you want a genetic metaphor, it's more like a dominant gene - a "child" (derivative work) of a GPLed work must also be GPLed.
Of course, unlike a dominant gene, all the descendants of the child will necessarily have it too. But it's still a better metaphor than "viral".