Well no, the real item is the way they obviously decided to sell the war based on lies and misinformation. Take the Downing Street Memo. Take Powell's presentation to the UN, which was a pack of lies. Even one of Powell's subordinates has said "We bullshitted the American people".
No, in this case, it would apply pressure onto the credit card processors (Visa and Mastercard and American Express) to audit their processors, and their sub-processors, etc. (sorry I don't know the correct technical terms). A similar thing is happening to try and stamp out payment processing for child pornography. Ultimately, the big credit card brands have operations in the US, and therefore they can be pressured to put pressure on their processors. That's the right way to do it, in my opinion, if you want to stamp out an illegal practice.
I've been able to get a special Post Office account with out any proof of address (it's how you get a proof of address if you don't have any other proof of address), but this can only be used for paying social security benefits into and drawing out that money, so it's useless for gambling.
When I tried to install Ubuntu, the installer asked me "Do you want to install optional packages?", then started running some complicated apt-get command for no reason when I said "Yes", and then crashed halfway through, leaving the machine with a full root partition (which as long time Linux users will probably know, tends to render your machine unusable).
Note that at no point in time did I say "Yes, I want you to install gazillions of useless packages that will fill up my hard drive". When I chose "Yes", I thought I was saying "Yes, I want to choose optional packages to install".
And if you want to dual boot, say, Windows 2000 and Fedora, you won't get any help from the Windows installer. Microsoft is, or at least was, last I checked, fanatically opposed to you running another operating system, and the installer doesn't even acknowledge that you might want to dual-boot with any other operating systems. This is symptomatic of their anti-competitive behaviour towards their competitors - and they've had competitors on the PC platform almost from day 1.
I understand your point, but filesharing really is sharing. My files are my private possessions, and it usually takes some amount of effort to find and download particular files. It's only in recent years that the copyright industry has spread the bizarre idea that when you buy a product it doesn't necessarily belong to you.
That's ridiculous. Occam's Razor suggests: Microsoft did not warn anyone about the Sony rootkit because they did not know about it. No-one knew about it apart from Sony and their subcontractors!
Come on, that's ridiculous. Most conspiracy theories are false. Take 9/11 conspiracy theories for example, or JFK conspiracy theories - many of them contradict each other on the face of it. Also, many of them were invented by clueless cranks (who say things like "Steel can't be melted by burning jet fuel", misunderstanding that the steel didn't have to literally melt, it merely had to weaken due to the heat and the impact).
I'm sure the perversions (sex and torture) are a reasonable facsimile of how people would behave given absolute control over someone else, and no peers to intervene.
Speak for yourself, mate! I don't think I would ever torture or rape people!
Far better that the company itself puts forth guidance as a sanity check than to have the stock buying public relying solely on the predictions of analysts (handicappers) which are often based on incomplete (or worse dead wrong) information and/or a desire to push a given stock because it's advantageous for their own portfolios to do so.
How about some personal responsibility here? Investors should look at the track-record of analysts, not just blindly trust them because of their job description or because they're on TV. Isn't this the self-correcting "hidden hand of the market" I keep hearing about?
So therefore analysts want Google to give guidance - so they trust Google to tell them if Google stock is going to crash? Even though they're not giving them any guidance right now?? WTF???
Well, true, but there are strings attached. Most importantly, you aren't allowed to license your work under the GPL, according to the specification's "EULA". (Copyright law doesn't allow you to restrict implementations of specifications, so presumably MS are attempting to use patents to do this. Patents are stronger than contracts, because contracts obviously don't apply to a non-party, but patents apply to everyone in a country, whether they have agreed to some bogus "EULA" or not.)
It can't be the coders, because you can't sell people
Sure you can. That's what a buyout is. Doesn't mean they'll stick around, but due to the fact that they want a roof over their head and etc., and this is the least effort way to continue to get it, many of them will stick around.
there would have to be some pretty good incentives offered to get people to stay and submit to a corporate mentality.
Who says they don't like a "corporate mentality" just because they happened to have started a project in their spare time, or happen to be employed by an open source project founder? - In fact, the company that got bought might already be very "corporate", in the sense of bullshit meetings, bullshit sales literature, bullshit management-speak, etc. etc. yadda yadda. But it's a paycheck.
I understand, more or less, that power does not accumulate in a parecon. But what about money? Aren't people allowed to have savings? Are they taxed? How does it work?
In other words, in order to protect the national security of Israel, Israel must remain an apartheid state. That tells you all about Israel you need to know.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the majority of it would be homework questions.
Note that at no point in time did I say "Yes, I want you to install gazillions of useless packages that will fill up my hard drive". When I chose "Yes", I thought I was saying "Yes, I want to choose optional packages to install".
Speak for yourself, mate! I don't think I would ever torture or rape people!
How about some personal responsibility here? Investors should look at the track-record of analysts, not just blindly trust them because of their job description or because they're on TV. Isn't this the self-correcting "hidden hand of the market" I keep hearing about?
Sure you can. That's what a buyout is. Doesn't mean they'll stick around, but due to the fact that they want a roof over their head and etc., and this is the least effort way to continue to get it, many of them will stick around.
there would have to be some pretty good incentives offered to get people to stay and submit to a corporate mentality.
Who says they don't like a "corporate mentality" just because they happened to have started a project in their spare time, or happen to be employed by an open source project founder? - In fact, the company that got bought might already be very "corporate", in the sense of bullshit meetings, bullshit sales literature, bullshit management-speak, etc. etc. yadda yadda. But it's a paycheck.