It's not hypocritical. As a socialist, I am in favour of the promotion of hatred of religion, but I am not in favour of the promotion of the hatred of people based merely on the colour of their skin. The latter has absolutely no socially redeeming value - wouldn't you agree?
And there are a lot of striving liars who will say anything to make a buck.
Well, this is not surprising. India doesn't have a comprehensive welfare state, which encourages people to strive really hard to get work. You probably would lie through your teeth too if you were only one generation away from destitution.
Like Linus, I don't really see the problem with DRM per se. It's just a tool. Tools can be used for good or for evil. You'll still be able to watch movies on TV and at the cinema, and soon I expect someone will develop a cheap alternative to Windows based on a specific DRM-enabled binary Linux distro - to enable people to watch DRM stuff without having to shell out for Windows Vista.
What I'm slightly worried about is DRMed Word documents being output by default by MS Office 2010 or something - but I'm not too worried, because I think Microsoft will face huge legal, technological and PR problems if they decide to go down that route.
Isn't there a problem with this somewhat blase attitude to it - it's only an extension?
Forgive me for being blunt, but there are literally hundreds of Firefox extensions out there: if (ENTIRELY HYPOTHETICALLY) some dumbass newbie with not the first clue about security decides to implement what he thinks is a wonderful new idea without thinking through the security implications, that's hardly the Mozilla Foundation's fault, is it? I could go out, today, and publicise a deliberately backdoored extension, and that would not be the Mozilla Foundation's fault.
Secondly, Greasemonkey is by no means essential.
Lastly, you can also get extensions for IE. You know, those browser toolbars and stuff like that.
Isn't one of the main selling points of FF the extensions? I know I personally don't see much difference between FF and an extension to it.
The difference, I know I in my firefox advocacy have never said to anyone "Not only is firefox secure, but so are the extensions available for it!" Because I would be silly to claim that.
Carbon sequestration - assuming it's a viable technique, of course - will need to be subsidised (directly or indirectly) to reverse its increased-cost effect, because free market economics does not put a value on reducing CO2 emissions, so realistically, government will have to adjust the equation by subsidising it.
D'oh! He's wrong. In the case of your sig, it should be "it's". Thus, once again proving greenrd's law: Every post which complains about another poster's spelling or grammar, will itself contain a spelling or grammattical error.
While what he's saying makes me roll my eyes, I understand exactly what he's doing: He's saying to his fellow hard-nosed capitalist businesspeople: "Don't believe that hippy BS. If you want good, maintained open source software, you should expect to pay for it, not get it for free". Which is a good thing if it works, because it means more jobs for open source programmers like myself!
After the recent Ask Slashdot story, one would have expected new life of some sort out of LinuxFund. Sadly that doesn't seem to be the case. In the meantime their account is building up hundreds of thousands of dollars.
In the UK, I understand that people can file a complaint with the Charities Commission if a charity doesn't seem to be meeting its stated aims and objectives. Does anyone know how things work in the US with regard to delinquent not-for-profit organisations? I'd like to see that money unlocked and actually used for useful OSS development.
If you're wasting company time and company resources writing personal emails, you deserve to be shit-canned.
Many companies have these things called "lunch breaks". Some jurisdictions even (gasp!) legally require them! I know you'll be shocked, just shocked, to hear about that anti-libertarian restriction on private contracting rights, but it's true.
but it is a race to the bottom. The only question is where are you going to be in that race?
That's a silly question. The only sane option is to resist the onward march towards lower wages, worse working conditions, and violent inter-ethnic conflict.
Amazing how hate for the developer company can do more damage to software than any exploit.
If it's from MS, it's immediately half assed right?
I think you're rambling incoherently / trolling here. What you're trying to get at, is not at all clear.
So let's just dump the.NET Framework already....Oh wait. That's cross-platform.
Microsoft's.NET platform only runs on Microsoft, so it is single-platform. And, Mono is not.NET. Mono is to.NET as Wine is to Windows. Indeed, Mono depends on Wine to implement the old windows APIs, and Wine has not even hit 1.0.
Finally, Fedora Linux, one of the most popular Linux distros, is avoiding Mono entirely due to patent issues.
The idea that command lines are inherently difficult to use and unfriendly is not based on any inherent property of command lines, but rather on the existing difficult-to-use and sucky implementations (of which one of the worst in wide use must surely be Oracle's SQLPLUS, but I digress.)
Let's take a simple problem. User wants to find a site that he recently visited. He can't find it on Google because he doesn't remember anything specific enough with which to find it. He goes to the History in firefox. The interface is crap. He gives up in disgust.
Alternate scenario: User types in command line "Give me all sites I visited in the last 10 days where the URL has 'fish' or 'carp' in it." This could either be typed in as is, or in a short form like "select sites <10days where url~='fish' or url~='carp'" The browser gives him exactly what he asked for, he finds the site and he's happy.
If the risk-taker doesn't get any rewards why should he take the risk in the first place?
Quite - which is why socialists don't advocate capitalism at all. Any so-called socialist that advocates for a "regulated market", is not really a socialist at all. They're most likely a liberal.
Slashdot Mirror
I have two problems with that rosy-eyed view:
A) How long have they been promising this?
B) MS Office will also support DRM. How can you have DRMed documents that can be opened in a non-DRMed, open source office suite. Answer... you can't!
Well, this is not surprising. India doesn't have a comprehensive welfare state, which encourages people to strive really hard to get work. You probably would lie through your teeth too if you were only one generation away from destitution.
What I'm slightly worried about is DRMed Word documents being output by default by MS Office 2010 or something - but I'm not too worried, because I think Microsoft will face huge legal, technological and PR problems if they decide to go down that route.
And that contradicts the parent post how exactly? What makes you think s/he doesn't understand that???
Forgive me for being blunt, but there are literally hundreds of Firefox extensions out there: if (ENTIRELY HYPOTHETICALLY) some dumbass newbie with not the first clue about security decides to implement what he thinks is a wonderful new idea without thinking through the security implications, that's hardly the Mozilla Foundation's fault, is it? I could go out, today, and publicise a deliberately backdoored extension, and that would not be the Mozilla Foundation's fault.
Secondly, Greasemonkey is by no means essential.
Lastly, you can also get extensions for IE. You know, those browser toolbars and stuff like that.
Isn't one of the main selling points of FF the extensions? I know I personally don't see much difference between FF and an extension to it.
The difference, I know I in my firefox advocacy have never said to anyone "Not only is firefox secure, but so are the extensions available for it!" Because I would be silly to claim that.
*bangs head against desk*.
NEWSFLASH: You are a stupid fuck.
(a) So that people can see what station they are at
(b) The old-fashioned kind of air conditioning. Essential in the hot summer months. Probably saves lives.
Think back to Charles Dicken's time, when his novels were often serialized. People were dying to get their hands on the next week's chapter.
In the UK, I understand that people can file a complaint with the Charities Commission if a charity doesn't seem to be meeting its stated aims and objectives. Does anyone know how things work in the US with regard to delinquent not-for-profit organisations? I'd like to see that money unlocked and actually used for useful OSS development.
Many companies have these things called "lunch breaks". Some jurisdictions even (gasp!) legally require them! I know you'll be shocked, just shocked, to hear about that anti-libertarian restriction on private contracting rights, but it's true.
(Totalitarian societies prefer sheeple even more, of course.)
That's a silly question. The only sane option is to resist the onward march towards lower wages, worse working conditions, and violent inter-ethnic conflict.
I think you're rambling incoherently / trolling here. What you're trying to get at, is not at all clear.
So let's just dump the .NET Framework already. ...Oh wait. That's cross-platform.
Microsoft's .NET platform only runs on Microsoft, so it is single-platform. And, Mono is not .NET. Mono is to .NET as Wine is to Windows. Indeed, Mono depends on Wine to implement the old windows APIs, and Wine has not even hit 1.0.
Finally, Fedora Linux, one of the most popular Linux distros, is avoiding Mono entirely due to patent issues.
Let's take a simple problem. User wants to find a site that he recently visited. He can't find it on Google because he doesn't remember anything specific enough with which to find it. He goes to the History in firefox. The interface is crap. He gives up in disgust.
Alternate scenario: User types in command line "Give me all sites I visited in the last 10 days where the URL has 'fish' or 'carp' in it." This could either be typed in as is, or in a short form like "select sites <10days where url~='fish' or url~='carp'" The browser gives him exactly what he asked for, he finds the site and he's happy.
Quite - which is why socialists don't advocate capitalism at all. Any so-called socialist that advocates for a "regulated market", is not really a socialist at all. They're most likely a liberal.
In what sense do you have first impression difficulty? How does this manifest itself?