>What makes you so sure this would take us closer to the end? Why won't this just further solidify the existing power structure?
Because I'm a fool.
No, really. I have stars in my eyes, and I expect a happy ending where the american people live out their noble dream by putting an end to this tyranny THEMSELVES, just like they did when they got here.
The king of England a tyrant? Free men wouldn't stand for it.
Huddled masses, yearning to breathe freely? Americans built a country to welcome them.
Why should these dreams be things of the past?
And in the end, no empire that wields the sort of oppresive power you are talking about can last, it WILL fall. History has shown it.
>The problem is politicians no longer view people as their electorate, instead they view complex algorithms of where to spend money on advertising as the equation to get elected.
You're right, dammit. And it's hard to fix; it verges on darwinism: If they can get an advantage using methods like you describe, then they are selected, and it reinforces itself. How can you fix something like that? Any attempts at leveling the field are usually subverted and exploited.
Americans need REAL leaders, who aren't just in it to get greased by lobbyists or cronies.
>We have become sheep.
No, you and many others like you are NOT sheep. You're seeing clearly. But of course the minute you try to ally yourself with others, it'll degenrate into extremism, radicalism, and possibly terrorism. Your mission is NOT to hurt the "sheep", no matter what. And I think any revolutionary leader that feels it is OK to sacrifice innocents to defeat such a system will undoubtedly establish an even greater tyranny.
What's the answer?
I think the U.S. has to change ONE law very quickly: It was ruled by the supreme court quite a while ago that corporations may exercise the same rights as individuals. THIS has got to go.
Without the individual being protected and valued ABOVE corporate interests, lobbies will always have more resources and weild MORE and MORE power.
Personally, I can't wait until all these repressive measures are put in place and the United States can finally implode and leave the rest of the world in peace.
The end of a tyrant is always something to rejoice about.
Sure, mod this flamebait if you want, but let me first say that I believe in the ideals of truth, freedom and the pursuit of liberty.
The problem is that NONE of those are being espoused by the U.S. and its policy makers, who instead seem hell-bent on enslaving their own people.
It's not the American dream I want to see destroyed, but the horrible travesty that has been put in its place, foisted on the american people by its own electorate who serve nothing but the corporations' dollar-interests.
I can't wait for the inevitable exploits and bugs that will cause cracker to be able to amass the personal information of everyone who is dumb enough to believe this man.
Can I get indemnisation from Microsoft for the problems this scheme will bring? No?
A little black book containing all your passwords that you keep on your person is the ONLY way to be safe.
If you'd read the parent you'd see that I'm arguing for freedom for individual users to break from UI norms like the one you quoted, but then again, you're an AC troll, so you probably don't do a lot of reading before posting.
I'm pretty sure you'll get lots of adherents: Remember when the Windows API appeared? A lot of DOS programmers said "The hell with this" and just got out of the business, because they couldn't (or didn't want to) learn the new thing. Which WAS pretty confusing (at first); "A handle??? WTF?" "I don't get this guy, Petzold..."
So expect plenty of people to balk at just chucking all the Win32 knowledge they've amassed just because Microsoft has decided that the wind is now blowing from the north and not the south anymore. The mindshare the current APIs have is absolutely huge, and some of that is actually being lost to Linux.
And anyway,.NET is a pretty high-level thing, so it'll undoubtedly run on ReactOS with no real difficulties, so what has MS really got? Their object-oriented, relational, database-like filesystem? Pfffft. An 800 pound gorilla may be something to watch out for, but it can't quite catch a smaller, nimbler animal very easily. I think where IBM WAS in the late 80s and early 90s, Microsoft now IS.
I didn't realize ReactOS was so far along. I tried stopping by earlier this week, but it was slashdotted, and when it wasn't, I wasn't really able to glean much about the progress in the short time I had.
One suggestion; it would be really cool if you had those completion graphs like wine has http://www.winehq.com/site/winapi_stats but I understand that that's a pain to maintain when you could be developing.
I understand. That's certainly true to an extent. Sort of what the IBM PC-XT did for hardware.
But at the same time, now that I've gotten used to Linux and its multiple window-managers, I feel so much happier. My UI looks and functions pretty much exactly like I want it to, now that it's not someone in Redmond deciding for me anymore.
Of course, your post hints that that kind of freedom can create problem (if I read your acronym properly), and maybe it's NOT for everyone, but then again, there is the freedom for a project like XPDE, so it's not really a problem.
So maybe this is the beginning of a renaissance, like the PC-XT and Windows before, it'll herald something new, something great, and the market will create the stabilizing influence you speak of.
Only I hope it comes from a general consensus and not from a tyrant like Microsoft.
OK, I'm not sure if I understand all the implications of what you wrote but I think it may indeed turn out for the best for every software vendor targetting Windows EXCEPT Microsoft:
Since really only Microsoft is trying to keep that front up about how their apps HAVE to be built-into the operating system, and have undoubtedly used a lot of underhanded methods to ensure it, it strikes me that The Rest Of Us have probably NOT gone that route.
And since Winelib and ReactOS (to a degree) are furnishing an API-level compatibility layer, and since everyone else's code would presumably be cleaner (ie. not using those 'tricks'), then everyone else's code will probably still work fine binding to it, whereas a lot of Microsoft's products will NOT.
So in the end, expect Microsoft to pull an about-face and try desperately to get their products to interoperate with Wine and ReactOS (I might still be dreaming in technicolor here).
Sort of like what they did with the Internet; ignore it for too long and then suddenly start claiming they invented it, when we all know Al Gore did.
So you're part of the ReactOS development team? Major cool. You're part of the bunch that still has the sacred fire, then.
For example, a DVD player can be running a variant of Linux, but it would differ in its possibilities from someone running OpenMosix.
It's not the 'One OS to rule them all', per se, it's more 'code should be open' because we've seen that closed-source is usually a way to hide deficiencies.
Could you elaborate on your statement 'MS has stabilized the market' ?
Not sure I understand your question, but no, I DON'T think everyone should run the same OS.
We need to keep Microsoft around for many reasons.
One is they keep everyone on their toes. Another reason is that they are so dang entertaining to watch, what with all their mischevious schemes!
Think how boring Slashdot alone would be if there was no MS to rail against.
OK, joking aside, I really do mean it when I write that enlightenment can come from any direction, and often arises out of conflict.
Just so long as Microsoft doesn't gain an advantage by getting unfair laws passed or some sort, the whole computer industry, and consumers will benefit.
Yep, I agree with you there about Windows NT starting out from a clean design (by a very smart team led by Dave Cutler); I read Inside Windows NT, by Helen Custer. And also I wrote a few device-drivers for NT and W2K, so I do understand the internals.
I remember hearing that around the time Windows 2000 came out, Cutler got shoved aside because he wasn't delivering features fast enough; he had this obstinacy that the code be stable and solid.
You also put your finger on the problem; a corporation decides there's not ENOUGH money, so they drop it.
Of course, all corporations want only what is best for us and wouldn't dream of ignoring our needs.
*crickets*
Yup, I like ReactOS, especially the agreement they have to collaborate with the Wine development team. THAT'S a winning combination.
I think by the time Microsoft stops all ports, we may actually see Winelib able to compile on ALL *nixes! LOL! I can dream, right?
You know what I REALLY wonder?
I wonder if in cloning Windows like ReactOS and Wine do, if they'll eventually wind up screwing their own architecture: Remember MS pulled that our-products-are-part-of-the-os-and-can't-be-remov ed BS a while ago?
In cloning Windows, will wine and ReactOS have to duplicate that god-awful approach? I really hope not.
Yes, I've heard Slack is quite slick (sorry for the bad pun).
I'm sure there's probably also a way to build a ports-system for it too, like Gentoo has.
Because for the truly clueless, finding the tarball, and performing the (albeit quite simple) incantations you mentioned would probably be too much.
But then again, that's part of the beauty of it all; all distros fit into a scheme of things varying across the spectrum of ease-of-use, installation, addressibility of specific needs, etc...
You know, I can't help wondering; Gentoo is quite easy to maintain, but pretty difficult to initially set up...
I don't know how that's going to resolve itself, but eventually it will.
You're undoubtedly right about what the standards mean and how they should be applied.
As for your second statement, I truly believe that vendors will do anything the market tells them to, and if people adopt Linux, then they will follow.
I read somewhere that Linux users now outnumber Mac users. Surely some vendor out there has got his finger on the pulse and is going to find a way to cash in.
This may not be the most popular point-of-view, but I actually really like compiling apps from source.
And with Gentoo, the whole process is insanely easy.
I believe the compile-from-source approach has the added benefit of mostly avoiding the problem you sometimes get with binary packages, where the binary needs a different version of the libs on your system.
True, with really BIG apps, compiling takes hours, but in those cases, there is usually a binary package for the app too in the catalog.
>So instead of specialising something for one CPU, you would have it generalised for all CPU's. This happens with some games, and they are often very crappy. I can't imagine it being any better for other software too.
Like Linux, you mean?
I'll take a *crappy* multi-platform OS like Linux over a specialized chip-specific OS like Windows ANY DAY!
No, seriously, I dumped Windows a year ago and I run Linux now, and although it has been more effort, I love it.
Then again, I was a Windows SDK programmer once upon a time, so maybe I've got a little streak of masochism....
You write like if software patents are a done deal. They're not.
As for code theft, you're right, but it has NOTHING to do with your clients. If you have included stolen source-code in your product, then YOU are liable, not the people using it.
No matter how hard Microsoft tries to distort reality about it, it won't change that fact.
Think about it, all of the public-domain code and open-source code that was published way before Microsoft was even a blip on the radar screams prior-art and the only way you could really profit with a stance like this is if someone actually COPIED your code, not if they reimplemented it on their own.
Even if software patents were to go ahead, most of them would be trivial to get revoked because of prior-art.
The best defense against all this is to simply adopt open-source and Linux and ignore whatever Microsoft is doing.
This will back-fire like all of Microsoft's other schemes.
When my higher-ups ask about it, I explain that Microsoft felt they needed to do that because they are undoubtedly hiding something, and we had better steer clear of MS and their products as they obviously represent legal dangers.
I mean I can,t see their source-code to SEE if they are infringing, so I can't take the chance and recommend them.
See what I mean? Another instance of Microsoft shooting itself in the foot.
Go Microsoft.
I really like it, I really do; nothing the open-source community does has this entertainment value.
Open-source is simply transparent and devoid of tricks, filled with reliable solutions, diversity and choice, and best of all, FREEDOM.
It would get mighty boring if Microsoft weren't making fools of themselves constantly, don't you think?
>I wonder, then: where is the market for this....?
Perhaps when hackers start using the vulnerabilities in the BGP protocol to attack the Internet and those vulnerabilities are not found to be present or are fixed faster in the open BSD code, that'll justify the project's existence.
I mean we've already seen that open-source has fewer vulnerabilites than closed-source in general (Think I.I.S. vs Apache), so this will just become another way to secure the Internet.
>"Two vortexes swirl simultaneously, one in a spiral and the other in a toroidal path, like a donut. The forces generated hold the vehicle to the wall and yet allow free movement because the cup never touches the surface." Like a hovercraft that sucks?
So in this particular case it's OK to say "Duke Sucks" ?
It's only a matter of time before China finishes off the rest of the lot.
China's economy is booming precisely because they don't have any of this ridiculous patenting.
Once China has the upper hand, it could turn around, rifle through the patents, scoop up all the ones owned by anyone willing to sell them and launch an attack against the remaining copmanies with them.
Being a socialist government doesn't automatically deny your citizens liberty, you know. In both France's and Canada's case, you could say that it's merely part of their social security, as pertains to health and welfare.
You know, the french rose up and revolted in the 1700s, not unlike what the fledgling american states did.
The french revolution was the end of their monarchy and the end of their political repression. It's really quite similar to the american revolution in that aspect.
Both people wanted to be free, both people threw off the shackles of their oppressors. And when I say people, it was the peasants in both cases; the american revolutionary army was formed by its countryfolk, and the french peasants mobilized and raided the bastille. Both proud, freedom-loving people. Don't count the french out.
My only worry now is that the typical american citizen has no idea how much the media is lying to him/her, because if s/he did, there'd be a revolution. ESPECIALLY because americans value freedom.
France's credo is Liberty, Equality and Fraternity.
Sounds like Liberty, Strong Families (fraternity) and Honour (acting with honour is treating others equitably, isn't it?)...
And the U.S. looks to the rest of the world like a bunch of whiny, politically-correct, puritan zealots who drive gas-guzzling SUVs and are only concerned with getting their own way...
I DON'T blame the american people. People are the same all over.
That means they are sheep that can be easily led.
The media in the U.S. is no longer concerned with reporting facts, but rather reporting what they are TOLD to, there doesn't seem to be a lot left for the people.
Corporations and the military/industrial complex are running things now.
It's a problem EVERYWHERE and it's up to all of us to do something about it.
Our governments are infested with pork-barreling liars.
Slashdot Mirror
>What makes you so sure this would take us closer to the end? Why won't this just further solidify the existing power structure?
Because I'm a fool.
No, really. I have stars in my eyes, and I expect a happy ending where the american people live out their noble dream by putting an end to this tyranny THEMSELVES, just like they did when they got here.
The king of England a tyrant? Free men wouldn't stand for it.
Huddled masses, yearning to breathe freely? Americans built a country to welcome them.
Why should these dreams be things of the past?
And in the end, no empire that wields the sort of oppresive power you are talking about can last, it WILL fall. History has shown it.
>The problem is politicians no longer view people as their electorate, instead they view complex algorithms of where to spend money on advertising as the equation to get elected.
You're right, dammit. And it's hard to fix; it verges on darwinism: If they can get an advantage using methods like you describe, then they are selected, and it reinforces itself. How can you fix something like that? Any attempts at leveling the field are usually subverted and exploited.
Americans need REAL leaders, who aren't just in it to get greased by lobbyists or cronies.
>We have become sheep.
No, you and many others like you are NOT sheep. You're seeing clearly. But of course the minute you try to ally yourself with others, it'll degenrate into extremism, radicalism, and possibly terrorism. Your mission is NOT to hurt the "sheep", no matter what. And I think any revolutionary leader that feels it is OK to sacrifice innocents to defeat such a system will undoubtedly establish an even greater tyranny.
What's the answer?
I think the U.S. has to change ONE law very quickly: It was ruled by the supreme court quite a while ago that corporations may exercise the same rights as individuals. THIS has got to go.
Without the individual being protected and valued ABOVE corporate interests, lobbies will always have more resources and weild MORE and MORE power.
That is my humble suggestion.
I agree with your sentiment.
Personally, I can't wait until all these repressive measures are put in place and the United States can finally implode and leave the rest of the world in peace.
The end of a tyrant is always something to rejoice about.
Sure, mod this flamebait if you want, but let me first say that I believe in the ideals of truth, freedom and the pursuit of liberty.
The problem is that NONE of those are being espoused by the U.S. and its policy makers, who instead seem hell-bent on enslaving their own people.
It's not the American dream I want to see destroyed, but the horrible travesty that has been put in its place, foisted on the american people by its own electorate who serve nothing but the corporations' dollar-interests.
If you can't live free, die.
May the end come quickly.
I can't wait for the inevitable exploits and bugs that will cause cracker to be able to amass the personal information of everyone who is dumb enough to believe this man.
Can I get indemnisation from Microsoft for the problems this scheme will bring? No?
A little black book containing all your passwords that you keep on your person is the ONLY way to be safe.
If you'd read the parent you'd see that I'm arguing for freedom for individual users to break from UI norms like the one you quoted, but then again, you're an AC troll, so you probably don't do a lot of reading before posting.
I'm pretty sure you'll get lots of adherents:
.NET is a pretty high-level thing, so it'll undoubtedly run on ReactOS with no real difficulties, so what has MS really got? Their object-oriented, relational, database-like filesystem? Pfffft. An 800 pound gorilla may be something to watch out for, but it can't quite catch a smaller, nimbler animal very easily. I think where IBM WAS in the late 80s and early 90s, Microsoft now IS.
Remember when the Windows API appeared? A lot of DOS programmers said "The hell with this" and just got out of the business, because they couldn't (or didn't want to) learn the new thing. Which WAS pretty confusing (at first); "A handle??? WTF?" "I don't get this guy, Petzold..."
So expect plenty of people to balk at just chucking all the Win32 knowledge they've amassed just because Microsoft has decided that the wind is now blowing from the north and not the south anymore. The mindshare the current APIs have is absolutely huge, and some of that is actually being lost to Linux.
And anyway,
I didn't realize ReactOS was so far along. I tried stopping by earlier this week, but it was slashdotted, and when it wasn't, I wasn't really able to glean much about the progress in the short time I had.
One suggestion; it would be really cool if you had those completion graphs like wine has
http://www.winehq.com/site/winapi_stats
but I understand that that's a pain to maintain when you could be developing.
Awesome stuff, keep up the good work!
I understand.
That's certainly true to an extent.
Sort of what the IBM PC-XT did for hardware.
But at the same time, now that I've gotten used to Linux and its multiple window-managers, I feel so much happier. My UI looks and functions pretty much exactly like I want it to, now that it's not someone in Redmond deciding for me anymore.
Of course, your post hints that that kind of freedom can create problem (if I read your acronym properly), and maybe it's NOT for everyone, but then again, there is the freedom for a project like XPDE, so it's not really a problem.
So maybe this is the beginning of a renaissance, like the PC-XT and Windows before, it'll herald something new, something great, and the market will create the stabilizing influence you speak of.
Only I hope it comes from a general consensus and not from a tyrant like Microsoft.
OK, I'm not sure if I understand all the implications of what you wrote but I think it may indeed turn out for the best for every software vendor targetting Windows EXCEPT Microsoft:
Since really only Microsoft is trying to keep that front up about how their apps HAVE to be built-into the operating system, and have undoubtedly used a lot of underhanded methods to ensure it, it strikes me that The Rest Of Us have probably NOT gone that route.
And since Winelib and ReactOS (to a degree) are furnishing an API-level compatibility layer, and since everyone else's code would presumably be cleaner (ie. not using those 'tricks'), then everyone else's code will probably still work fine binding to it, whereas a lot of Microsoft's products will NOT.
So in the end, expect Microsoft to pull an about-face and try desperately to get their products to interoperate with Wine and ReactOS (I might still be dreaming in technicolor here).
Sort of like what they did with the Internet; ignore it for too long and then suddenly start claiming they invented it, when we all know Al Gore did.
So you're part of the ReactOS development team? Major cool. You're part of the bunch that still has the sacred fire, then.
OK, I understand.
My answer is still 'no'; we need multiple OSes.
For example, a DVD player can be running a variant of Linux, but it would differ in its possibilities from someone running OpenMosix.
It's not the 'One OS to rule them all', per se, it's more 'code should be open' because we've seen that closed-source is usually a way to hide deficiencies.
Could you elaborate on your statement 'MS has stabilized the market' ?
Sorry I'm so dense.
Not sure I understand your question, but no, I DON'T think everyone should run the same OS.
We need to keep Microsoft around for many reasons.
One is they keep everyone on their toes.
Another reason is that they are so dang entertaining to watch, what with all their mischevious schemes!
Think how boring Slashdot alone would be if there was no MS to rail against.
OK, joking aside, I really do mean it when I write that enlightenment can come from any direction, and often arises out of conflict.
Just so long as Microsoft doesn't gain an advantage by getting unfair laws passed or some sort, the whole computer industry, and consumers will benefit.
Yep, I agree with you there about Windows NT starting out from a clean design (by a very smart team led by Dave Cutler);
v ed BS a while ago?
I read Inside Windows NT, by Helen Custer.
And also I wrote a few device-drivers for NT and W2K, so I do understand the internals.
I remember hearing that around the time Windows 2000 came out, Cutler got shoved aside because he wasn't delivering features fast enough; he had this obstinacy that the code be stable and solid.
You also put your finger on the problem; a corporation decides there's not ENOUGH money, so they drop it.
Of course, all corporations want only what is best for us and wouldn't dream of ignoring our needs.
*crickets*
Yup, I like ReactOS, especially the agreement they have to collaborate with the Wine development team. THAT'S a winning combination.
I think by the time Microsoft stops all ports, we may actually see Winelib able to compile on ALL *nixes! LOL! I can dream, right?
You know what I REALLY wonder?
I wonder if in cloning Windows like ReactOS and Wine do, if they'll eventually wind up screwing their own architecture: Remember MS pulled that our-products-are-part-of-the-os-and-can't-be-remo
In cloning Windows, will wine and ReactOS have to duplicate that god-awful approach? I really hope not.
Yes, I've heard Slack is quite slick (sorry for the bad pun).
I'm sure there's probably also a way to build a ports-system for it too, like Gentoo has.
Because for the truly clueless, finding the tarball, and performing the (albeit quite simple) incantations you mentioned would probably be too much.
But then again, that's part of the beauty of it all; all distros fit into a scheme of things varying across the spectrum of ease-of-use, installation, addressibility of specific needs, etc...
You know, I can't help wondering; Gentoo is quite easy to maintain, but pretty difficult to initially set up...
I don't know how that's going to resolve itself, but eventually it will.
Yes, I know NT was developed on MIPS and has a proper HAL layer and all that.
So when can I get my Alpha version of Windows XP?
What? They dropped it?
But surely since they STARTED from a portable base they must still be maintaining all those ports, right? Right?
*crickets*
Oh yeah, every piece of software I've ever written is available on all platforms, even ones yet to be named or even exist.
You just can't get ahold of it.
You're undoubtedly right about what the standards mean and how they should be applied.
As for your second statement, I truly believe that vendors will do anything the market tells them to, and if people adopt Linux, then they will follow.
I read somewhere that Linux users now outnumber Mac users. Surely some vendor out there has got his finger on the pulse and is going to find a way to cash in.
This may not be the most popular point-of-view, but I actually really like compiling apps from source.
And with Gentoo, the whole process is insanely easy.
I believe the compile-from-source approach has the added benefit of mostly avoiding the problem you sometimes get with binary packages, where the binary needs a different version of the libs on your system.
True, with really BIG apps, compiling takes hours, but in those cases, there is usually a binary package for the app too in the catalog.
>So instead of specialising something for one CPU, you would have it generalised for all CPU's. This happens with some games, and they are often very crappy. I can't imagine it being any better for other software too.
Like Linux, you mean?
I'll take a *crappy* multi-platform OS like Linux over a specialized chip-specific OS like Windows ANY DAY!
No, seriously, I dumped Windows a year ago and I run Linux now, and although it has been more effort, I love it.
Then again, I was a Windows SDK programmer once upon a time, so maybe I've got a little streak of masochism....
You write like if software patents are a done deal. They're not.
As for code theft, you're right, but it has NOTHING to do with your clients. If you have included stolen source-code in your product, then YOU are liable, not the people using it.
No matter how hard Microsoft tries to distort reality about it, it won't change that fact.
Think about it, all of the public-domain code and open-source code that was published way before Microsoft was even a blip on the radar screams prior-art and the only way you could really profit with a stance like this is if someone actually COPIED your code, not if they reimplemented it on their own.
Even if software patents were to go ahead, most of them would be trivial to get revoked because of prior-art.
The best defense against all this is to simply adopt open-source and Linux and ignore whatever Microsoft is doing.
This will back-fire like all of Microsoft's other schemes.
When my higher-ups ask about it, I explain that Microsoft felt they needed to do that because they are undoubtedly hiding something, and we had better steer clear of MS and their products as they obviously represent legal dangers.
I mean I can,t see their source-code to SEE if they are infringing, so I can't take the chance and recommend them.
See what I mean? Another instance of Microsoft shooting itself in the foot.
Go Microsoft.
I really like it, I really do; nothing the open-source community does has this entertainment value.
Open-source is simply transparent and devoid of tricks, filled with reliable solutions, diversity and choice, and best of all, FREEDOM.
It would get mighty boring if Microsoft weren't making fools of themselves constantly, don't you think?
With open-source there are NO such issues; if any infringing code is found, it is simply replaced.
End of story.
Way to confuse and complicate things for your clients, Microsoft.
That's another reason why no one should run MS products, it's legally entangled.
>I wonder, then: where is the market for this....?
Perhaps when hackers start using the vulnerabilities in the BGP protocol to attack the Internet and those vulnerabilities are not found to be present or are fixed faster in the open BSD code, that'll justify the project's existence.
I mean we've already seen that open-source has fewer vulnerabilites than closed-source in general (Think I.I.S. vs Apache), so this will just become another way to secure the Internet.
This means the time has come to completely open-source router firmware development.
In the end, what choice do we have? If we take it as truth that open-source is more secure, then it also applies to routers.
BGP and other applicable protocols are available as RFCs
And anyhow, it seems BGP isn't all that secure to begin with.
Wait! I've got a better one:
"Duke both sucks and blows"
So in this particular case it's OK to say "Duke Sucks" ?
It's only a matter of time before China finishes off the rest of the lot.
China's economy is booming precisely because they don't have any of this ridiculous patenting.
Once China has the upper hand, it could turn around, rifle through the patents, scoop up all the ones owned by anyone willing to sell them and launch an attack against the remaining copmanies with them.
Forget missles, baby! Here come the patent-wars!
We're more in agreement than you might think;
Being a socialist government doesn't automatically deny your citizens liberty, you know. In both France's and Canada's case, you could say that it's merely part of their social security, as pertains to health and welfare.
You know, the french rose up and revolted in the 1700s, not unlike what the fledgling american states did.
The french revolution was the end of their monarchy and the end of their political repression. It's really quite similar to the american revolution in that aspect.
Both people wanted to be free, both people threw off the shackles of their oppressors. And when I say people, it was the peasants in both cases; the american revolutionary army was formed by its countryfolk, and the french peasants mobilized and raided the bastille. Both proud, freedom-loving people. Don't count the french out.
My only worry now is that the typical american citizen has no idea how much the media is lying to him/her, because if s/he did, there'd be a revolution. ESPECIALLY because americans value freedom.
Anyhow, good luck with the election.
Oddly enough, it is exactly the same, isn't it?
France's credo is Liberty, Equality and Fraternity.
Sounds like Liberty, Strong Families (fraternity) and Honour (acting with honour is treating others equitably, isn't it?)...
And the U.S. looks to the rest of the world like a bunch of whiny, politically-correct, puritan zealots who drive gas-guzzling SUVs and are only concerned with getting their own way...
I DON'T blame the american people. People are the same all over.
That means they are sheep that can be easily led.
The media in the U.S. is no longer concerned with reporting facts, but rather reporting what they are TOLD to, there doesn't seem to be a lot left for the people.
Corporations and the military/industrial complex are running things now.
It's a problem EVERYWHERE and it's up to all of us to do something about it.
Our governments are infested with pork-barreling liars.