Hello?? This happened in England a few decades ago. The metric system was not in widespread use until the last few decades. If most of the world can do it, I'm sure Americans can too, unless they have a problem with the "not invented here" syndrome, which I believe they do.
Your analogy is based on flawed logic. The church did not fund science, it persecuted it.
If government has the money to spend on the military, ie. Reagan era, the republicans should shut up on decreasing spending when it was a republican president which oversaw the huge deficit bulge in the 80s (think SDI).
Yes, we need a more streamlined (read, more efficient) government, more reform across the board and modern management techniques introduced in our institutions. However, that does not mean that cutting money for research is a Good Thing(tm). It is on the contrary.
Industrial research is primarily focused on technolgy, not pure science. One can look back in history to find a era which scientific research essentially disappeared. The Romans were very technologically adept; however, their mindset was not to advance learning, but rather for more pratical purposes, which pales in comparison to the achievement of the Greeks.
The privatization of NASA and space exploration in general does not need to be a Bad Thing(tm). Getting locked into the mindset that private industry will solve all the problems is. Do we really want to live on a mars owned by a for-profit company? Don't forget that most of the early expeditions to future european colonies were funded by the crown of their respective countries.
There *is* room for pure research and the non-profit/government funding that is usually associated with it.
If you think having scientific institutions funded by government is bad, wait to you see the tobacco institute. That's what happens when industries fund science, bending science to their advantage. That sounds like the church to me.
Why would local authorities agreee to this ? Essentially they are taking the right for them to collect sales tax. This would upset the balance of power between the local authorities and the federal government pretty badly.
1. If choice the the only freedom we have, we live in a pretty sick sad world. Yup..
2. Yes, the artist do get their share, but most newcomers sign deadbeat contracts that they will hardly ever make decent money out of.
3. Most artists earn most of their money by performing live.
4. If I have my freedom to link to stuff ideas/files/whatever taken away from me, they might as well take my right to talk about them.
5. As long as the perpetrator does not physically store the data/information/whatever in a medium that is directly traced to him, then it *should* not be a problem.
6. It is consistant with the canons of justice, that no person should be held liable for crimes he did not commit. He did not actually break the copyright agreement by putting a file on his website. He only linked them from someone elses' site. He did not directly profit from this action. People could might as well visited his site without downloading on the files. Thus, he did not copy the content, nor distributed the content. He was merely *refering* to it.
7. The final moral responsibility is with the person who makes the decision to download the file or not to. Although I may not agree with this stance myself (as I said before), this is the stance taken by the tabacco firms on illnesses caused by tabacoo consumption;
8. Which directly relates to what you said, "they didn't _need_ to sign one, did they?". Which translates to - "Well, they didn't need to smoke, did they?" and "Well, they didn't need to click on the link and download the mp3, didn't they?"
9. Which brings up the question, why is (or isn't) euthanasia legal where you live?:)
You don't get it do you? Copyright law is an abstract concept that treats ideas as physical objects. Furthermore, it is not natural law, it does not cause bodily damage, lost of life or limb, or any lost freedom.
In other words it is like me lending my McLaren F1 (not like I have one though) to my friend, and getting sued because I *knew* my friend would drive 100mph over the speed limit.
I hope I didn't purposely commit any 3rd degree misdemeanors.
There are no laws that say you cannot provide bibliographic links (or any directions) to information that would break the law. If there was, we would be pretty much living in a police state.
Furthermore, they could of just went and sued the owner of the site where the mp3s are. They didn't. They wanted a monkey act. Now they get bad publicity.
If this world was *moral* or *ethical*, there wouldn't be lawyers would there?
Is the major record labels ripping off musicans moral and ethical in your book as well? I sure hope not.
Face it, this society is built on greed, and if sueing a 17 year old in Sweden would help reap in the reprecussions from copied mp3s and preserve the multi-billion dollar empire, then hell, there's no *moral* or *ethical* problem behind it!
No matter how much some of you would like to equate the two, it won't happen. As previously commented -
Democracy assists in the preservation of freedom, but doesn't not ensure it
The US is already stepping in the direction of mob rule. More politicians are concerned with various issues rathen than be concerned with the most fundamental issue of all - the preservation of individual freedoms.
Yes and no. The basic idea of capitalism is private ownership of the means of production (in other words capital). It is NOT that anyone can own capital (it is nowhere as noble as that), but rather there should not be public capital. This was the assumption the classical economists base their arguments on. That went down the drain during the great depression. Now we are seeing a resurgence of this theory.
Yes, I concur. Statist communism is bad. Libertarian socialism (anarchism) is good. It advocates decentralized decision making and puts freedom at the forefront of its agenda. Futhermore, individualist anarchism revolve around *free market* principles, but with workers selling their own "fruits of labor", insteal of corporation profiting from them.
If you look at the most modern management theory on worker empowerment, decentralised decision making, team building and the such, it bases itself on one common theme - The people who meet the customers and actually do the grunt work are the peopole who are most qualified and knowledgable about their work. In essence, type Y/Z management theory which trust people to actually like to work has many similarities to anarchist ideals.
This contrasts to the original capitalist assumptions that people are in fact lazy and the only motivational factor for them to work is monetary profit (ie. greed). This assumption has turned many of the world's larget companies into bloated bureaucracies such as GM (with it's 15 levels of management to supervise everyone and managment knowing jack about making cars haha). Look what cars GM made in the 80's and you will understand why capitalism, as it was originally intended, has failed.
Capitalism in its truest form exploits both employees and customers for profit. However, we do not live in a strictly capitalist world. We are heavily influenced by capitalism, and for proof, look at how the world is obsessed with intellectual property. Intellectual property is the natural way of extending capitalist control to ideas, literature, music, movies and software.
However, does capitalist property controls belong in the realms of ideas and intellectual (as opposed to physical) works. The argument GNU makes is *no*; property should be physical; ideas should be free (as in speech).
That is the reason why RMS stands so firmly on the issue why FS should not be called OSS. The political and ideological implications for free software is that is ensures the ultimate preservation for freedom of ideas; not just resulting in better software, but a better system for the world.
Futhermore, capitalism and free-market are not synonyms. They should not be used as such. It is possible to have a free-market without predominant capitalist ideals. However, many business and political elites would like us to think otherwise.
Free software, on the other hand, is one step in the right direction. It is relieving monopoly control over the intellectual ideas that they should never of had control over in the first place. They do no behave like physical property and they should not be treated as such.
To make your point short, you mean the intellectual property such as software, should not be treated as physical property, because its value increase with every distributed copy.
The NPL is not compatible with the GPL, so Mozilla source will not be integrated with GNOME source. However, since the component system of GNOME is almost finished (Bonobo), it will allow GNOME apps to embed the Mozilla engine.
I thought about this a little more. Maybe not everybody should be eligible to submit FRMs, only those that qualify as moderators and have not submitted any comments on that discussion.
It would be great if there is a feature that would allow registered users to request a comment for moderation. This would filter out a lot of trolls and spam that get into the discussion now and then.
Essentially anybody would be able to submit one RFM for a comment, and the number of RRMs for a comment would be display with it. Exceptionaly bad comments as well as eceptionally good coments gets lots of RFMs from the readers. This way, moderators can identify the comments that need moderation easily. There could even be a slash filter threshold to display comments with high RFMs to make it easy for the moderators. It would save the moderators time and make the job much easier than just browsing hundreds of messages at -1.
Security holes are more like open doors. Sooner or later, someone's going to venture in and look around (regardless if they steal or not). That's why you lock your windows and door, and it's the same reason you lock your car after you park it. If you leave them open, it's a invitation for people to come in and mess around.
It is really easy to do and people should make a habit of it. Apply the same logic with computer security, and people should make a habit of securing computers.
Would the army build a base with a section of the fence missing? Probably not. Would the army arrest a guy who happens to venture in a unfenced section? Probably yes, but at least he won't be in the slammer longer than someone such as Chad or Kelvin.
There are so many hosting and ISP businesses that have ran out of cash and have been bought out, or shut down.
It happens all the time, businesses shut down due to cash flow problems, and no it's not just because Linux users don't pay up. It's not fair to say that, and it's just as bad as saying everyone from Redmond came from hell.
I send my condolences to Chris, and thank him for all the time he spent on MassLinux.
What's wrong with having a good, well thought out and working welfare system. A system that can train people and find them jobs.
Yes we can't have a system that rewards laziness, and we don't have to. There are a lot of progress in reforming the welfare system.
Instead of starving people out and scaring the s*&t out of people who can't help themselves already, why don't we go and empower them with skills, knowledge and give them a kickstart?
Real freedom is empowering people; giving opportunities to those who have none. Just because we f*&ked it up before doesn't mean it'll never work. It just means we still have to learn how to make it work.
Slashdot Mirror
Hello?? This happened in England a few decades ago. The metric system was not in widespread use until the last few decades. If most of the world can do it, I'm sure Americans can too, unless they have a problem with the "not invented here" syndrome, which I believe they do.
Your analogy is based on flawed logic. The church did not fund science, it persecuted it.
If government has the money to spend on the military, ie. Reagan era, the republicans should shut up on decreasing spending when it was a republican president which oversaw the huge deficit bulge in the 80s (think SDI).
Yes, we need a more streamlined (read, more efficient) government, more reform across the board and modern management techniques introduced in our institutions. However, that does not mean that cutting money for research is a Good Thing(tm). It is on the contrary.
Industrial research is primarily focused on technolgy, not pure science. One can look back in history to find a era which scientific research essentially disappeared. The Romans were very technologically adept; however, their mindset was not to advance learning, but rather for more pratical purposes, which pales in comparison to the achievement of the Greeks.
The privatization of NASA and space exploration in general does not need to be a Bad Thing(tm). Getting locked into the mindset that private industry will solve all the problems is. Do we really want to live on a mars owned by a for-profit company? Don't forget that most of the early expeditions to future european colonies were funded by the crown of their respective countries.
There *is* room for pure research and the non-profit/government funding that is usually associated with it.
If you think having scientific institutions funded by government is bad, wait to you see the tobacco institute. That's what happens when industries fund science, bending science to their advantage. That sounds like the church to me.
Why would local authorities agreee to this ? Essentially they are taking the right for them to collect sales tax. This would upset the balance of power between the local authorities and the federal government pretty badly.
1. If choice the the only freedom we have, we live in a pretty sick sad world. Yup..
:)
2. Yes, the artist do get their share, but most newcomers sign deadbeat contracts that they will hardly ever make decent money out of.
3. Most artists earn most of their money by performing live.
4. If I have my freedom to link to stuff ideas/files/whatever taken away from me, they might as well take my right to talk about them.
5. As long as the perpetrator does not physically store the data/information/whatever in a medium that is directly traced to him, then it *should* not be a problem.
6. It is consistant with the canons of justice, that no person should be held liable for crimes he did not commit. He did not actually break the copyright agreement by putting a file on his website. He only linked them from someone elses' site. He did not directly profit from this action. People could might as well visited his site without downloading on the files. Thus, he did not copy the content, nor distributed the content. He was merely *refering* to it.
7. The final moral responsibility is with the person who makes the decision to download the file or not to. Although I may not agree with this stance myself (as I said before), this is the stance taken by the tabacco firms on illnesses caused by tabacoo consumption;
8. Which directly relates to what you said, "they didn't _need_ to sign one, did they?". Which translates to - "Well, they didn't need to smoke, did they?" and "Well, they didn't need to click on the link and download the mp3, didn't they?"
9. Which brings up the question, why is (or isn't) euthanasia legal where you live?
You don't get it do you? Copyright law is an abstract concept that treats ideas as physical objects. Furthermore, it is not natural law, it does not cause bodily damage, lost of life or limb, or any lost freedom.
In other words it is like me lending my McLaren F1 (not like I have one though) to my friend, and getting sued because I *knew* my friend would drive 100mph over the speed limit.
I hope I didn't purposely commit any 3rd degree misdemeanors.
There are no laws that say you cannot provide bibliographic links (or any directions) to information that would break the law. If there was, we would be pretty much living in a police state.
Furthermore, they could of just went and sued the owner of the site where the mp3s are. They didn't. They wanted a monkey act. Now they get bad publicity.
If this world was *moral* or *ethical*, there wouldn't be lawyers would there?
Is the major record labels ripping off musicans moral and ethical in your book as well? I sure hope not.
Face it, this society is built on greed, and if sueing a 17 year old in Sweden would help reap in the reprecussions from copied mp3s and preserve the multi-billion dollar empire, then hell, there's no *moral* or *ethical* problem behind it!
Wake up and take your daily dose of caffine!
No matter how much some of you would like to equate the two, it won't happen. As previously commented -
Democracy assists in the preservation of freedom, but doesn't not ensure itThe US is already stepping in the direction of mob rule. More politicians are concerned with various issues rathen than be concerned with the most fundamental issue of all - the preservation of individual freedoms.
Yes and no. The basic idea of capitalism is private ownership of the means of production (in other words capital). It is NOT that anyone can own capital (it is nowhere as noble as that), but rather there should not be public capital. This was the assumption the classical economists base their arguments on. That went down the drain during the great depression. Now we are seeing a resurgence of this theory.
When does communist == dictator? Communism had nothing to do with fascism, until Lenin came along that is!!
Yes, I concur. Statist communism is bad. Libertarian socialism (anarchism) is good. It advocates decentralized decision making and puts freedom at the forefront of its agenda. Futhermore, individualist anarchism revolve around *free market* principles, but with workers selling their own "fruits of labor", insteal of corporation profiting from them.
If you look at the most modern management theory on worker empowerment, decentralised decision making, team building and the such, it bases itself on one common theme - The people who meet the customers and actually do the grunt work are the peopole who are most qualified and knowledgable about their work. In essence, type Y/Z management theory which trust people to actually like to work has many similarities to anarchist ideals.
This contrasts to the original capitalist assumptions that people are in fact lazy and the only motivational factor for them to work is monetary profit (ie. greed). This assumption has turned many of the world's larget companies into bloated bureaucracies such as GM (with it's 15 levels of management to supervise everyone and managment knowing jack about making cars haha). Look what cars GM made in the 80's and you will understand why capitalism, as it was originally intended, has failed.
Capitalism in its truest form exploits both employees and customers for profit. However, we do not live in a strictly capitalist world. We are heavily influenced by capitalism, and for proof, look at how the world is obsessed with intellectual property. Intellectual property is the natural way of extending capitalist control to ideas, literature, music, movies and software.
However, does capitalist property controls belong in the realms of ideas and intellectual (as opposed to physical) works. The argument GNU makes is *no*; property should be physical; ideas should be free (as in speech).
That is the reason why RMS stands so firmly on the issue why FS should not be called OSS. The political and ideological implications for free software is that is ensures the ultimate preservation for freedom of ideas; not just resulting in better software, but a better system for the world.
Futhermore, capitalism and free-market are not synonyms. They should not be used as such. It is possible to have a free-market without predominant capitalist ideals. However, many business and political elites would like us to think otherwise.
Free software, on the other hand, is one step in the right direction. It is relieving monopoly control over the intellectual ideas that they should never of had control over in the first place. They do no behave like physical property and they should not be treated as such.
Yes, but doesn't anarcho-capitalism undermine the principles of both ideologies? Some sort of a naming game?
To make your point short, you mean the intellectual property such as software, should not be treated as physical property, because its value increase with every distributed copy.
:)
Woohoo.. There you go
The NPL is not compatible with the GPL, so Mozilla source will not be integrated with GNOME source. However, since the component system of GNOME is almost finished (Bonobo), it will allow GNOME apps to embed the Mozilla engine.
I thought about this a little more. Maybe not everybody should be eligible to submit FRMs, only those that qualify as moderators and have not submitted any comments on that discussion.
It would be great if there is a feature that would allow registered users to request a comment for moderation. This would filter out a lot of trolls and spam that get into the discussion now and then.
Essentially anybody would be able to submit one RFM for a comment, and the number of RRMs for a comment would be display with it. Exceptionaly bad comments as well as eceptionally good coments gets lots of RFMs from the readers. This way, moderators can identify the comments that need moderation easily. There could even be a slash filter threshold to display comments with high RFMs to make it easy for the moderators. It would save the moderators time and make the job much easier than just browsing hundreds of messages at -1.
maybe for now.
It's good to have choice when choice is the only freedom you have in this society...
However I've yet to see BSD advocates do a similar thing.
Maybe you haven't looked hard enough. Yeah, go add more FUD in the argument.
Then you must also agree that one is not free unless until one has the freedom to murder or be murdered.
Security holes are more like open doors. Sooner or later, someone's going to venture in and look around (regardless if they steal or not). That's why you lock your windows and door, and it's the same reason you lock your car after you park it. If you leave them open, it's a invitation for people to come in and mess around.
It is really easy to do and people should make a habit of it. Apply the same logic with computer security, and people should make a habit of securing computers.
Would the army build a base with a section of the fence missing? Probably not. Would the army arrest a guy who happens to venture in a unfenced section? Probably yes, but at least he won't be in the slammer longer than someone such as Chad or Kelvin.
Vaccine!! Vaccine!! Vaccine!!
Court Marshall!! Court Marshall!!
Maybe they already found a way to incorporate Jini into nano-chips contained within the Anthrax vaccine. No wonder.
But there are families that live off the minimum wage, and there are schools that serves those districts.
Coke IS the real thing..
There are so many hosting and ISP businesses that have ran out of cash and have been bought out, or shut down.
It happens all the time, businesses shut down due to cash flow problems, and no it's not just because Linux users don't pay up. It's not fair to say that, and it's just as bad as saying everyone from Redmond came from hell.
I send my condolences to Chris, and thank him for all the time he spent on MassLinux.
What's wrong with having a good, well thought out and working welfare system. A system that can train people and find them jobs.
Yes we can't have a system that rewards laziness, and we don't have to. There are a lot of progress in reforming the welfare system.
Instead of starving people out and scaring the s*&t out of people who can't help themselves already, why don't we go and empower them with skills, knowledge and give them a kickstart?
Real freedom is empowering people; giving opportunities to those who have none. Just because we f*&ked it up before doesn't mean it'll never work. It just means we still have to learn how to make it work.