I'm still miffed that I lost my freedom to dump toxic waste in drinking water.
I can't believe you really did that. If you did, and when you say "I lost my freedom", I hope that means you're in jail for violating the rights of others. But, what I don't understand is how that relates to the State monitoring your every move in public, and after that's allowed who knows how much longer before they do it in private?
Why can't I take guns on airlines?
Because, unlike guarding your privacy from intrusive government, carrying a lethal weapon can be contributive to intentionally lethal acts? Couple that with the ease in which a single bullet could quickly wipe-out hundreds of lives, on the plane and on the ground, made the argument for a gun-ban on planes that much easier to swallow. Mass murder, as it happens, was illegal pre-9/11.
Why can't I have the freedom to molest young children?
Because you would be violating their rights?
This cameras sounds like a good one. Do people really have an expectation of privacy when they're on public streets?
Not from each other, but from a government proven to abuse the power granted to it by the people at every opportunity. Your unreasonable fear of everything in life (from sudden heart-attacks to skidding in the rain), and incessant need for safety, encroaches upon my liberty to enjoy life without intrusive government. Just behave sensibly and you'll survive as your forefathers did across millions of years simply to produce the unique individual known as *you*. There's no government-monitored camera on you right now, and look you're still breathing!!
I'd love to see national ID's, I don't even understand the privacy argument against it.
The reluctance you don't understand stems from years of documented abuse by what at first appeared to be reasonable (to the population at the time) requests and benign acts by various governments to keep order. The arguments are always the same, as are the results. I don't have to name recent government abuses to you, you know them. We won't even go into the governmental abuses throughout history. To ignore the lessons from the past and think that they won't be repeated is naive. People haven't changed, and it's people in government who abuse their responsibilities and their authority. Most do so without penalty.
It's simple the government needs a way to identify it's citizens.
Whether true or not, Gnome and KDE have the appearance of playing catch-up with Windows. I understand that between Windows and the Mac GUI, Windows has the larger market share. But, the Mac interface has always garnered the higher praise for all sort of criteria such as ease of use/utility, eye candy/asthetics...etc. The disparity in the two system's marketshare may have more to do with the fact Apple requires you to buy their hardware to use MacOS, and Microsoft doesn't. In hindsite, I wonder if MacOS would've been comptetive against Windows without Apple's hardware sale requirement.
It's curious that Gnome and KDE based their GUI design template on Windows and not the Mac. Clearly, they're basing their design decisions on bringing a Free Windows to the masses, not a Free MacOS. This may very well be because the developers were more familiar with Windows as opposed to MacOS, but was it the better decision? Or, is it possible that the distinction between Windows and Mac are no longer as apparent as they were only a few years ago, and the Mac no longer has the lead as a better GUI?
1) Most issue organizations already track representattives and how they vote on issues dear to that organization. For example, Gun Owners of America allows you to enter your zip code and see how your reps voted on 2nd amendment legislation throughout the session.
It's good that there are specific groups who track the voting habits of their representatives. The fact that there are more than one indicates that each are too narrow in their idealogy to cater to the general voter. I believe there may even be a general voter oriented site out there that keeps tabs on votes made or missed. But, I don't believe I've seen one that keeps track of promises made and maps them to promises broken, with a rating system that graphs or charts their progress as contractually honorable or intentionally duplicitous (or anything in between).
Why are you wanting Slashdot to do this FOR you?
I don't expect it to be implemented by anyone. It was simply conjecture. Anyone is welcome to take the idea and implement if they find it feasable, provided it's under an Open Source license;-)
Personally, I think the idea is rough and requires refinement through discussion and debate. There are probably quite a few holes I haven't thought about.
The Library of Congress' Thomas system lets you see every piece of legislation that's been introduced in the last 15 years or so. Who voted for what, who sponsored what bills, what bills died in committee, etc.
Thanks for the tip. Come to think of it, Lexis-Nexus may even be a source for speech(promises) which can be mapped to resulting legislation or broken word. Unfortunately, the service is rather expensive. Any ideas for another source of comprehensively compiled promises waiting to be broken?
If you care enough to bitch about your elected representatives not doing what you voted them into office to do, then DO SOMETHING about it--don't expect someone else to do it for you.
Why not? As I stated before, I'm not asking/. to do anything. However, the fact that there's already a politically oriented Section on/. indicates that there are members interested in politics. Under the unlikely event someone were to be interested enough to extend the ideas and implement them, what do you care? Although flattering, you're assuming skills in myself that may not exist. However, after your vote of confidence, who knows!
How Is ESX Server Different from GSX Server?
ESX Server is designed for up to 16 processor departmental and enterprise servers, and runs its virtualization layer natively on hardware. VMware GSX Server is designed for up to four processor workgroup and departmental servers. It runs as an application on top of a host operating system.
So, GSX runs as an app on Linux, while ESX runs linux as a service or maybe even as a library?
Samuel Delaney is one of the few authors who actually teaches you something as you read one of his stories. Civilization, the meaning and impact of words, the experience of attention from the perpective of another, the selfishness/selflessness of an act, the private essence of a woman...He brings "humanity" to his characters, as you realize that you too have been/could be experiencing the same thing. And, he adds "width" to your imagination as you realize that what we often read is so narrow.
That's all fine, and I'm glad they caught the monster. The difference there is that the camera was not run by the Big Brother. It was a private citizen's watching his property. Murderers can still be caught without cameras run by Big Brother.
Pardom me. I meant to write "legislation" where I use "legislature" in the following sentence:
Examples would be actions such as pushing promised legislature and voting on the legislature of others who help achieve the goal of the politician's promises(I think most people would be shocked by the number of our "representatives" who don't actually even show up to vote on major issues).
Survlance in a public street is and should be legitimate. The minute they start pointing their cameras into my home -- using infrared or other privacy invading technologies, I might get upset.
It'll be too late to "get upset" by then. Give 'em an inch, and they'll take a yard. The overwhelming force of conformity will move the baseline of what is tolerable and what is not. Like most social forces, a moving baseline happens to be quite invisible. By the time the baseline has moved, and if you haven't conformed to the newer era of lesser privacy, you'll wake up to your complacency in shock. But, by then you'll be in the minority. And, while in the minority, you'll be without influence to take the yard back. Though if the people in power are still accessible (assuming no other shifts in the baseline), you might regain the inch you so willingly gave up.
It's been a long time since I've read 1984 as a kid, and I admit not getting its significance at such a young age. What's appalling is that so many adults don't get it in their "maturity". If there's a fault in the book (or in my memory), it may be that it did not emphasize enough the fact that the loss of freedoms were not immediate, they were gradual, like slow poison.
In light of this article, I don't believe it's coincidental that 1984 is set in London. Afterall, George Orwell was an Englishman, and knew the frailties of his society. The U.S. is also undergoing a similar change. However, with a paper contract, such as the Constitution, to help keep track of what baselines may be changing, sudden reductions of freedom like those immediately following 9/11 don't occur too often. But, the creeping losses that deteriorate the paper contract like so many termites nibbling at the edges, continue due to one single factor. Our inability to hold our "representatives" to their promises when they are still candidates. We allow these breaches of contracts (written and oral speeches) with impunity. What are we, suckers? Until there's a way to hold contract-violators to their promises with punitive damages, our rights will continue to slide.
It would be an interesting experiment if/. kept a forum tracking promises made and broken by our "representatives". They could be graded, not based on qualitative subjective issues, but on actual objectively quantitative performances on a variety of actions (or lack of), or contrary actions that could be mapped back to their promises. Examples would be actions such as pushing promised legislature and voting on the legislature of others who help achieve the goal of the politician's promises(I think most people would be shocked by the number of our "representatives" who don't actually even show up to vote on major issues). Contrary actions are actions which work directly against the promises (i.e. a lie) such as the recurrent lie of "no new taxes". In addition, if the promised legislation doesn't meet the requirements of the contract stated, the politician will get a poor rating by/. if nowhere else. Bar charts could help immediately identify the losers from the winners. Some people may even approach the ratings as an RPG game (i.e. characteristics such as womanizer, excessive imbiber, right-wing nut, left-wing tree-hugger), with a bar chart for each significant property of the politician.
He's looking for an Open Source application as well as an Open Source infrastructure to support the application. I believe SimpleData (the application) isn't dual-licensed like MySQL, but strictly proprietary despite its basis on Open Source technology. That's nothing against you, but it isn't what he asked for.
However, I've got to give you guys props for putting up this page:
http://www.sysbotz.com/articles.htm
You're selling a solution that requires some technical know-how by your clients. Rather than leaving them to Google themselves to death for basic steps on how to get from point A to point B, you've given them a good hand to set things up. Obviously, this is not only good for the clients, but helps you by making it that much easier for your clients to consider buying your product.
Smart thinking!
I'm not familiar with MySQL. Is it possible to start and stop the service from your application, as your application loads and unloads? I mean, even if there's a delay in starting MySQL (MS SQL starts and stops very quickly), it should be possible to do it in the background as your application loads without much (if any) delay from the user's perception.
So, you've argued the point that geeks are human. So what? As humans, geeks still have the need to propogate, ie get laid. They just don't do it under the same circumstances that everyone else does it in.
You've forgotten the social equalizer - alcohol. The geeky, ugly, and the beautiful can all equally imbibe in large amounts (see Girls Gone Wild Part XXXV). When senses are impaired, everyone is on equal social footing. Or, to paraphrase - in the dark, everyone looks the same.
I suspect that it will be a two-pronged beginning to the cycle of job creation. I call it a cycle because as knowledge is the noblest of the job areas, after which the cycle must start all over again from the beginning. Also, keep in mind that poverty brings about the worst in people. All IT people will "move on" to go into religion or prostitution.
Looking in the mirror lately, the prospects for the latter didn't look like a lucrative career move. So, I'm heading to the barber's for a $5 Jimmy Swaggart haircut, and I'm going to try to convince my wife to dye her hair pink. Next step...public cable access (revival tents are out of my price range at the moment).
Tales of the Dying Earth By Jack Vance. Just keep this in mind when reading this oddly beautiful, highly amusing, and often wistfully melancholic collection: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke
Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke
Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke
Gateway (and sequels) by Frederik Pohl
Dhalgren by Samuel R. Delany
The Fall of The Towers by Samuel R. Delany
Stars In My Pocket Like Grains Of Sand by Samuel R.Delany
Protector by Larry Niven
The Mote In God's Eye by Larry Niven/Jerry Pournelle
Hyperion Cantos by Dan Simmons
The Many-Colored Land (and sequels) by Julian May
Earthclan by David Brin
Demu Trilogy by F.M. Busby
THE FOREVER WAR by Joe Haldeman
Anything from Gene Wolfe, Clifford D. Simak, Ray Bradbury, Roger Zelazny (by himself), Samuel R. Delany (you'll learn as you read his works) or Philip K. Dick will make you think. But, Jack Vance can outwit them all!
Where I differ from the average "kindergarten teacher" is that I believe that enforced/coerced sharing strips the deed of any moral value.
I'm not sure, but I think your intent was to state that it would strip the deed of any altruistic value, which is different. Enforcement of a rule doesn't strip moral value from the act if there is intent to share. Without enforcement of rules, there is little chance of true freedom, only anarchy or tyranny. America is often called the land of laws. It is also often called the home of the free. They are not mutually exclusive concepts, but rather complementary as one needs the other to protect it.
You should share because it is the right thing to do, not because there is a legal obligation to do so.
What makes something the "right thing to do"? What gives any act a "moral value"? The "right thing" denotes that something can be the wrong thing, and connotes that no one should do the wrong thing. Similarly, "moral value" denotes that there is an opposite, immoral value. And, no one should behave in an immoral manner. You've simply switched that which compels from legality to an act of conscience. The enforcement is still there, but it is a case of the strength of internal coercion instead of that of an external coercion. The fact remains, coercion is still applied. And, extrapolating from your statement, it is good if that individual were to be coerced by their conscience because it is "the right thing to do". The flaw lies in that not all individuals share the same levels of conscience. Some will feel more obligated than others, while others will feel less guilty than some. Some people feel this is less practical in its implementation, and leads to internal conflicts that the GPL avoids altogether. With the GPL there is no wrestling as to what is the right thing to do when using someone else's code. It is made quite clear what should be done by the fact that it has been licensed under the GPL.
Under the BSD, the individual can disregard their conscience (or lack of conscience), and under the GPL the individual can disregard their legal obligation. But, in both cases there are consequences. Those who rely on the GPL simply prefer a more practical model where consequences are visible, while those who prefer the BSD encourage a more idealized altruistic model where consequences are less visible.
I should mention that these concepts of morals and correctness are components that lead to the logic of the Golden Rule. Although, they don't comprise the Golden Rule itself. Following the Golden Rule is the right thing to do for the most practical of reasons. There's really nothing altruistic about it. It is practical to avoid immoral behavior due to possible unpleasant consequences and for the promotion of peace. By doing to others as you'd have done to you, you're stating that you wish others well for your own sake. Following this rule is the basis of civilized behavior. The GPL is the closest license that proscribes the Golden Rule. Reciprocation can be a simple wish, as in your case, or it can be a matter of fact, if the GPL is used.
However, as the original author, I do feel some small reverse consideration is in order.
And, you're not alone it that feeling. I realize that in your case you wouldn't demand reciprocation, but that doesn't negate the feeling that you deserve, at least in the smallest sense, some "reverse consideration". And, you're not wrong to want it as most people would consider that fair or rational behavior.
Your statement captures in a nutshell what many have decided reflects their feelings regarding the subject. It's nearly instintive, but is actually taught in kindergarden. Treat those as you would be treated, aka the Golden Rule. And, more people feel the need for fair treatment, than not, by making use of the GPL.
For your personal idealogical leanings, it isn't wrong in not applying the GPL, as you've indicated that the need for enforcing reciprocation is not as important to you. And, you've had good relations with authors who are strongly motivated to share (so strong that they guarantee it with the GPL), so it's not likely you will have problems with GPL'd code.
SCO should put up a $250,000 reward for information leading to the arrest & conviction of Darl McBride; for driving their company head-first into a brickwall without a helmet.
"Actually, anything non-GPL is not Free Software."
Yes, and to hitler anyone non aryan was not human.
But that doesn't make it true.
Saying anything, include your misguided attempt at analogy, doesn't make anything true. Okay, and...?
You don't get to redefine free to mean the opposite of what it means, just as he doesn't get to redefine human.
You just made an analogy that claims simply saying something doesn't make it true. That would include your absurd statement over what I do or don't get to say!
We can clear this up right now. I agree 100% with what this meaning of free is. I believe most literate people would agree as well. Even if you did agree with that definition, you may find that we would still disagree on the definition of freedom in regards to Open Source development. The reason may escape you, but it is simply subjective interpretation. An unavoidable human condition. It isn't clear to people who take things literally how such a thing is allowable, but in this case take my word for it. The best you can do is allow the market to prove who's right and who's wrong. It all honesty, it won't even do that. It will simply prove who's best fit for the purposes of the majority.
I love how you talk about "community" and "greedy" and the "Selfish".... you sure are a communist, aren't ya?
No. But, what are you, who snidely loves the talk of "greedy" and "Selfish" and the "community"? Someone who prefers greed and selfishness? An uncivilized person? What label of anti-community superiority would you prefer to wear?
Bet ya think corporations are generally evil?
Only those who violate the community's trust and don't reciprocate. Correction, I also don't like corporations who lie, cheat, steal, and hurt people. You might even say that I don't like uncivilized behavior in corporation, as I wouldn't like it in an individual.
I think you've never written a line of code in your life.
Let's hope for your financial well being you don't invest in the stock market.
If you had, you'd know you can't close open sourced software in a commercial environemnt practially-- you have to commit your changes to the public tree, otherwise you have to track what everyone else does.
And, of course companies like Sun, HP, IBM, SGI, SCO...etc, never had the resources to do that during the Unix Wars and later up until the late 90's. They all made Unix from scratch and none of their closed source Unix variants ever came from previously open source roots. Please, your showing your historical ignorance. Of course, you can always claim that saying anything doesn't make it true - HA!
All the "stealing" you guys think you're preventing is a figment of your imagination.
The literally minded can be considered a danger to themselves, as well as the community. Theft in terms of the loss of social profit can be considered a simile. A more accurate phrasing would be that when a person or company takes something from the community, without giving back to the community, that act is like theft of the community's potential gain. Those who are concerned over the loss of the community's potential gain simply use the GPL to mitigate that. Those who prefer the BSD don't view the community's interest in the same manner, allowing the proprietary forks during the Unix Wars to occur.
Just like all communists who want to force others to live like they do "for the good of the community" you try to force people to your ideology,
Please point out where I force anyone to do anything. The laws you are forced to live by are passed by those representing the community. Are those laws communist? Are you, for living under them? Your simple worldvi
As usual, you are incapable of hearing what anyones saying, being totally fixated on the idea that someone might be stealing your code.
And, you're incapable of listening to common sense. There's no actual physical theft in the closure of BSD code, only a social loss of potential benefit due to the actions of the greedy few. Society does not benefit when others take and don't reciprocate. With the misuse of the BSD, only the selfish benefit off the back of society.
If you will notice, the BSD people are open source people-- they put their changes into the public tree.
Please point out where I stated otherwise.
They don't think of it as "giving back" they think of it as their part of the process.
How they think of their labor is their prerogative. But, let's highlight that you are clearly speaking of people who are contributing back to the society from where they have taken the works of others, improved on them, and given back. If they don't "think" they're giving back is a different point. The point is important in the distinction between the philosophies of the BSD and GPL licenses. However, the point is not important in the social nature of Open Source as they are showing what happens when Open Source works, and when the altruistic nature of the BSD is at its best.
But, those aren't the people I'm talking about. It is disingenuous for you to bring up an argument as if altruistic BSDers were the people I speak disparagingly of. I'm talking about the people who intentionally misuse the altruistic nature of the BSD (where everyone is simply on their honour in contributing if they take from society). These people don't steal code literally (as that would be a legal matter), they steal it figuratively from society's future. They don't contribute to society, they are parasitical towards it.
The result is that those who originally worked on the code can no longer legally follow its evolution in the hands of another who has selfishly kept it from those who first created it. The parasites may even threaten legal action if the originators should try to reverse engineer their own creation. Naturally, it is the fault of the originator if they have a change of heart and wish to see their work as it's evolved in the hands of others. They shouldn't have licensed it under the BSD. But, it is society who has lost in the long run.
You are so fixated on the evil bourguoise capitalist parasites that you can't even notice that they produce more benefit to the community than your fascist communist party that wants to control everything.
Everything that you understand is questionable. When you travel down a public freeway towards your job(assuming you're employable), do you rail against fascist communist taxation systems which paid for it? When you peruse a public library, do you grit your teeth at the humiliation at not being able to afford to send money to the newspaper for a back copy, as you pull out a periodical to xerox for a report that you have to turn in to your public school teacher? When you see people throwing frisbees at a public park, do you stick your head out your window and yell obscenities intermingled with commentaries regarding their obvious politico-social bent? If you walk the public beaches, does your mouth froth at the thought of all this valuable realestate wasted on the stupid masses who are really only good for usury?
You are just like the foolish russians after the revolution... but let me guess, your knowledge of history is so poor you cannot comprehend why the comparison is appropos.
Perhaps. But, then I've lost track of your offtopic babblings, and the unlikely possibility of my missing historical references is the least of your concerns. In any case, I will try to respond.
Egalitarianism is often cited as fascio-communistic by those who understand neither egalitarianism, fascism, or communism, but mistakenly
No, the real moral here is that some people have a vastly different conception of good taste. I'm aware that many Slashdotters like to bash LOTR because they think it makes them look cool and different, but I suspect you're the only person here who thinks LOTR sucked but the Matrix sequels were good.
Or, the fellow could be living proof that the Superman mythos is reality, and a Bizarro world really exists. Where cars have square wheels and Matrix-3 sweeps the Oscars.
We never really got to see Sauron in Jackson's LOTR, but we could see Morgoth!
We could see Sauron, Morgoth, and Shelob's mama, Ungoliant. Remember, Sauron was a busy bee in the Silmarillion. However, that all depends on if the producers were intent to film the book as a series, and not only a handful of the stories into a single movie.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is that great?
would you want to live in the world with the same freedoms of uncivilized times?
9/10/2001 was uncivilized times? In that case, yes! The only way to ensure democracy is transparency in the government, not in the citizenry. I would consider this age of secret trials, secret military tribunals, and illegal captivity without due process to be uncivilized.
I'm still miffed that I lost my freedom to dump toxic waste in drinking water.
I can't believe you really did that. If you did, and when you say "I lost my freedom", I hope that means you're in jail for violating the rights of others. But, what I don't understand is how that relates to the State monitoring your every move in public, and after that's allowed who knows how much longer before they do it in private?
Why can't I take guns on airlines?
Because, unlike guarding your privacy from intrusive government, carrying a lethal weapon can be contributive to intentionally lethal acts? Couple that with the ease in which a single bullet could quickly wipe-out hundreds of lives, on the plane and on the ground, made the argument for a gun-ban on planes that much easier to swallow. Mass murder, as it happens, was illegal pre-9/11.
Why can't I have the freedom to molest young children?
Because you would be violating their rights?
This cameras sounds like a good one. Do people really have an expectation of privacy when they're on public streets?
Not from each other, but from a government proven to abuse the power granted to it by the people at every opportunity. Your unreasonable fear of everything in life (from sudden heart-attacks to skidding in the rain), and incessant need for safety, encroaches upon my liberty to enjoy life without intrusive government. Just behave sensibly and you'll survive as your forefathers did across millions of years simply to produce the unique individual known as *you*. There's no government-monitored camera on you right now, and look you're still breathing!!
I'd love to see national ID's, I don't even understand the privacy argument against it.
The reluctance you don't understand stems from years of documented abuse by what at first appeared to be reasonable (to the population at the time) requests and benign acts by various governments to keep order. The arguments are always the same, as are the results. I don't have to name recent government abuses to you, you know them. We won't even go into the governmental abuses throughout history. To ignore the lessons from the past and think that they won't be repeated is naive. People haven't changed, and it's people in government who abuse their responsibilities and their authority. Most do so without penalty.
It's simple the government needs a way to identify it's citizens.
How does it do it now? Have
It's curious that Gnome and KDE based their GUI design template on Windows and not the Mac. Clearly, they're basing their design decisions on bringing a Free Windows to the masses, not a Free MacOS. This may very well be because the developers were more familiar with Windows as opposed to MacOS, but was it the better decision? Or, is it possible that the distinction between Windows and Mac are no longer as apparent as they were only a few years ago, and the Mac no longer has the lead as a better GUI?
= 9J =
It's good that there are specific groups who track the voting habits of their representatives. The fact that there are more than one indicates that each are too narrow in their idealogy to cater to the general voter. I believe there may even be a general voter oriented site out there that keeps tabs on votes made or missed. But, I don't believe I've seen one that keeps track of promises made and maps them to promises broken, with a rating system that graphs or charts their progress as contractually honorable or intentionally duplicitous (or anything in between).
Why are you wanting Slashdot to do this FOR you?
I don't expect it to be implemented by anyone. It was simply conjecture. Anyone is welcome to take the idea and implement if they find it feasable, provided it's under an Open Source license ;-)
Personally, I think the idea is rough and requires refinement through discussion and debate. There are probably quite a few holes I haven't thought about.
The Library of Congress' Thomas system lets you see every piece of legislation that's been introduced in the last 15 years or so. Who voted for what, who sponsored what bills, what bills died in committee, etc.
Thanks for the tip. Come to think of it, Lexis-Nexus may even be a source for speech(promises) which can be mapped to resulting legislation or broken word. Unfortunately, the service is rather expensive. Any ideas for another source of comprehensively compiled promises waiting to be broken?
If you care enough to bitch about your elected representatives not doing what you voted them into office to do, then DO SOMETHING about it--don't expect someone else to do it for you.
Why not? As I stated before, I'm not asking /. to do anything. However, the fact that there's already a politically oriented Section on /. indicates that there are members interested in politics. Under the unlikely event someone were to be interested enough to extend the ideas and implement them, what do you care? Although flattering, you're assuming skills in myself that may not exist. However, after your vote of confidence, who knows!
= 9J =
How Is ESX Server Different from GSX Server?
ESX Server is designed for up to 16 processor departmental and enterprise servers, and runs its virtualization layer natively on hardware. VMware GSX Server is designed for up to four processor workgroup and departmental servers. It runs as an application on top of a host operating system.
So, GSX runs as an app on Linux, while ESX runs linux as a service or maybe even as a library?
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
Examples would be actions such as pushing promised legislature and voting on the legislature of others who help achieve the goal of the politician's promises(I think most people would be shocked by the number of our "representatives" who don't actually even show up to vote on major issues).
= 9J =
It'll be too late to "get upset" by then. Give 'em an inch, and they'll take a yard. The overwhelming force of conformity will move the baseline of what is tolerable and what is not. Like most social forces, a moving baseline happens to be quite invisible. By the time the baseline has moved, and if you haven't conformed to the newer era of lesser privacy, you'll wake up to your complacency in shock. But, by then you'll be in the minority. And, while in the minority, you'll be without influence to take the yard back. Though if the people in power are still accessible (assuming no other shifts in the baseline), you might regain the inch you so willingly gave up.
It's been a long time since I've read 1984 as a kid, and I admit not getting its significance at such a young age. What's appalling is that so many adults don't get it in their "maturity". If there's a fault in the book (or in my memory), it may be that it did not emphasize enough the fact that the loss of freedoms were not immediate, they were gradual, like slow poison.
In light of this article, I don't believe it's coincidental that 1984 is set in London. Afterall, George Orwell was an Englishman, and knew the frailties of his society. The U.S. is also undergoing a similar change. However, with a paper contract, such as the Constitution, to help keep track of what baselines may be changing, sudden reductions of freedom like those immediately following 9/11 don't occur too often. But, the creeping losses that deteriorate the paper contract like so many termites nibbling at the edges, continue due to one single factor. Our inability to hold our "representatives" to their promises when they are still candidates. We allow these breaches of contracts (written and oral speeches) with impunity. What are we, suckers? Until there's a way to hold contract-violators to their promises with punitive damages, our rights will continue to slide.
It would be an interesting experiment if /. kept a forum tracking promises made and broken by our "representatives". They could be graded, not based on qualitative subjective issues, but on actual objectively quantitative performances on a variety of actions (or lack of), or contrary actions that could be mapped back to their promises. Examples would be actions such as pushing promised legislature and voting on the legislature of others who help achieve the goal of the politician's promises(I think most people would be shocked by the number of our "representatives" who don't actually even show up to vote on major issues). Contrary actions are actions which work directly against the promises (i.e. a lie) such as the recurrent lie of "no new taxes". In addition, if the promised legislation doesn't meet the requirements of the contract stated, the politician will get a poor rating by /. if nowhere else. Bar charts could help immediately identify the losers from the winners. Some people may even approach the ratings as an RPG game (i.e. characteristics such as womanizer, excessive imbiber, right-wing nut, left-wing tree-hugger), with a bar chart for each significant property of the politician.
= 9J =
Assembly Language Step-by-step: Programming with DOS and Linux
by Jeff Duntemann
ISBN: 0471375233
= 9J =
What was it that you built? Could you elaborate?
= 9J =
= 9J =
However, I've got to give you guys props for putting up this page:
http://www.sysbotz.com/articles.htm
You're selling a solution that requires some technical know-how by your clients. Rather than leaving them to Google themselves to death for basic steps on how to get from point A to point B, you've given them a good hand to set things up. Obviously, this is not only good for the clients, but helps you by making it that much easier for your clients to consider buying your product. Smart thinking!
= 9J =
I've been thinking of trying that with FireBird.
= 9J =
You've forgotten the social equalizer - alcohol. The geeky, ugly, and the beautiful can all equally imbibe in large amounts (see Girls Gone Wild Part XXXV). When senses are impaired, everyone is on equal social footing. Or, to paraphrase - in the dark, everyone looks the same.
= 9J =
I suspect that it will be a two-pronged beginning to the cycle of job creation. I call it a cycle because as knowledge is the noblest of the job areas, after which the cycle must start all over again from the beginning. Also, keep in mind that poverty brings about the worst in people. All IT people will "move on" to go into religion or prostitution.
Looking in the mirror lately, the prospects for the latter didn't look like a lucrative career move. So, I'm heading to the barber's for a $5 Jimmy Swaggart haircut, and I'm going to try to convince my wife to dye her hair pink. Next step...public cable access (revival tents are out of my price range at the moment).
= 9J =
Araminta Station (and its sequels) by Jack Vance
Emphyrio by Jack Vance
To Live Forever by Jack Vance
Planet of Adventure by Jack Vance
Tales of the Dying Earth By Jack Vance. Just keep this in mind when reading this oddly beautiful, highly amusing, and often wistfully melancholic collection: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke
Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke
Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke
Gateway (and sequels) by Frederik Pohl
Dhalgren by Samuel R. Delany
The Fall of The Towers by Samuel R. Delany
Stars In My Pocket Like Grains Of Sand by Samuel R.Delany
Protector by Larry Niven
The Mote In God's Eye by Larry Niven/Jerry Pournelle
Hyperion Cantos by Dan Simmons
The Many-Colored Land (and sequels) by Julian May
Earthclan by David Brin
Demu Trilogy by F.M. Busby
THE FOREVER WAR by Joe Haldeman
Anything from Gene Wolfe, Clifford D. Simak, Ray Bradbury, Roger Zelazny (by himself), Samuel R. Delany (you'll learn as you read his works) or Philip K. Dick will make you think. But, Jack Vance can outwit them all!
Good eating!
= 9J =
I'm not sure, but I think your intent was to state that it would strip the deed of any altruistic value, which is different. Enforcement of a rule doesn't strip moral value from the act if there is intent to share. Without enforcement of rules, there is little chance of true freedom, only anarchy or tyranny. America is often called the land of laws. It is also often called the home of the free. They are not mutually exclusive concepts, but rather complementary as one needs the other to protect it.
You should share because it is the right thing to do, not because there is a legal obligation to do so.
What makes something the "right thing to do"? What gives any act a "moral value"? The "right thing" denotes that something can be the wrong thing, and connotes that no one should do the wrong thing. Similarly, "moral value" denotes that there is an opposite, immoral value. And, no one should behave in an immoral manner. You've simply switched that which compels from legality to an act of conscience. The enforcement is still there, but it is a case of the strength of internal coercion instead of that of an external coercion. The fact remains, coercion is still applied. And, extrapolating from your statement, it is good if that individual were to be coerced by their conscience because it is "the right thing to do". The flaw lies in that not all individuals share the same levels of conscience. Some will feel more obligated than others, while others will feel less guilty than some. Some people feel this is less practical in its implementation, and leads to internal conflicts that the GPL avoids altogether. With the GPL there is no wrestling as to what is the right thing to do when using someone else's code. It is made quite clear what should be done by the fact that it has been licensed under the GPL.
Under the BSD, the individual can disregard their conscience (or lack of conscience), and under the GPL the individual can disregard their legal obligation. But, in both cases there are consequences. Those who rely on the GPL simply prefer a more practical model where consequences are visible, while those who prefer the BSD encourage a more idealized altruistic model where consequences are less visible.
I should mention that these concepts of morals and correctness are components that lead to the logic of the Golden Rule. Although, they don't comprise the Golden Rule itself. Following the Golden Rule is the right thing to do for the most practical of reasons. There's really nothing altruistic about it. It is practical to avoid immoral behavior due to possible unpleasant consequences and for the promotion of peace. By doing to others as you'd have done to you, you're stating that you wish others well for your own sake. Following this rule is the basis of civilized behavior. The GPL is the closest license that proscribes the Golden Rule. Reciprocation can be a simple wish, as in your case, or it can be a matter of fact, if the GPL is used.
= 9J =
And, you're not alone it that feeling. I realize that in your case you wouldn't demand reciprocation, but that doesn't negate the feeling that you deserve, at least in the smallest sense, some "reverse consideration". And, you're not wrong to want it as most people would consider that fair or rational behavior.
Your statement captures in a nutshell what many have decided reflects their feelings regarding the subject. It's nearly instintive, but is actually taught in kindergarden. Treat those as you would be treated, aka the Golden Rule. And, more people feel the need for fair treatment, than not, by making use of the GPL.
For your personal idealogical leanings, it isn't wrong in not applying the GPL, as you've indicated that the need for enforcing reciprocation is not as important to you. And, you've had good relations with authors who are strongly motivated to share (so strong that they guarantee it with the GPL), so it's not likely you will have problems with GPL'd code.
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
Yes, and to hitler anyone non aryan was not human.
But that doesn't make it true.
Saying anything, include your misguided attempt at analogy, doesn't make anything true. Okay, and...?
You don't get to redefine free to mean the opposite of what it means, just as he doesn't get to redefine human.
You just made an analogy that claims simply saying something doesn't make it true. That would include your absurd statement over what I do or don't get to say!
We can clear this up right now. I agree 100% with what this meaning of free is. I believe most literate people would agree as well. Even if you did agree with that definition, you may find that we would still disagree on the definition of freedom in regards to Open Source development. The reason may escape you, but it is simply subjective interpretation. An unavoidable human condition. It isn't clear to people who take things literally how such a thing is allowable, but in this case take my word for it. The best you can do is allow the market to prove who's right and who's wrong. It all honesty, it won't even do that. It will simply prove who's best fit for the purposes of the majority.
I love how you talk about "community" and "greedy" and the "Selfish".... you sure are a communist, aren't ya?
No. But, what are you, who snidely loves the talk of "greedy" and "Selfish" and the "community"? Someone who prefers greed and selfishness? An uncivilized person? What label of anti-community superiority would you prefer to wear?
Bet ya think corporations are generally evil?
Only those who violate the community's trust and don't reciprocate. Correction, I also don't like corporations who lie, cheat, steal, and hurt people. You might even say that I don't like uncivilized behavior in corporation, as I wouldn't like it in an individual.
I think you've never written a line of code in your life.
Let's hope for your financial well being you don't invest in the stock market.
If you had, you'd know you can't close open sourced software in a commercial environemnt practially-- you have to commit your changes to the public tree, otherwise you have to track what everyone else does.
And, of course companies like Sun, HP, IBM, SGI, SCO...etc, never had the resources to do that during the Unix Wars and later up until the late 90's. They all made Unix from scratch and none of their closed source Unix variants ever came from previously open source roots. Please, your showing your historical ignorance. Of course, you can always claim that saying anything doesn't make it true - HA!
All the "stealing" you guys think you're preventing is a figment of your imagination.
The literally minded can be considered a danger to themselves, as well as the community. Theft in terms of the loss of social profit can be considered a simile. A more accurate phrasing would be that when a person or company takes something from the community, without giving back to the community, that act is like theft of the community's potential gain. Those who are concerned over the loss of the community's potential gain simply use the GPL to mitigate that. Those who prefer the BSD don't view the community's interest in the same manner, allowing the proprietary forks during the Unix Wars to occur.
Just like all communists who want to force others to live like they do "for the good of the community" you try to force people to your ideology,
Please point out where I force anyone to do anything. The laws you are forced to live by are passed by those representing the community. Are those laws communist? Are you, for living under them? Your simple worldvi
And, you're incapable of listening to common sense. There's no actual physical theft in the closure of BSD code, only a social loss of potential benefit due to the actions of the greedy few. Society does not benefit when others take and don't reciprocate. With the misuse of the BSD, only the selfish benefit off the back of society.
If you will notice, the BSD people are open source people-- they put their changes into the public tree.
Please point out where I stated otherwise.
They don't think of it as "giving back" they think of it as their part of the process.
How they think of their labor is their prerogative. But, let's highlight that you are clearly speaking of people who are contributing back to the society from where they have taken the works of others, improved on them, and given back. If they don't "think" they're giving back is a different point. The point is important in the distinction between the philosophies of the BSD and GPL licenses. However, the point is not important in the social nature of Open Source as they are showing what happens when Open Source works, and when the altruistic nature of the BSD is at its best.
But, those aren't the people I'm talking about. It is disingenuous for you to bring up an argument as if altruistic BSDers were the people I speak disparagingly of. I'm talking about the people who intentionally misuse the altruistic nature of the BSD (where everyone is simply on their honour in contributing if they take from society). These people don't steal code literally (as that would be a legal matter), they steal it figuratively from society's future. They don't contribute to society, they are parasitical towards it.
The result is that those who originally worked on the code can no longer legally follow its evolution in the hands of another who has selfishly kept it from those who first created it. The parasites may even threaten legal action if the originators should try to reverse engineer their own creation. Naturally, it is the fault of the originator if they have a change of heart and wish to see their work as it's evolved in the hands of others. They shouldn't have licensed it under the BSD. But, it is society who has lost in the long run.
You are so fixated on the evil bourguoise capitalist parasites that you can't even notice that they produce more benefit to the community than your fascist communist party that wants to control everything.
Everything that you understand is questionable. When you travel down a public freeway towards your job(assuming you're employable), do you rail against fascist communist taxation systems which paid for it? When you peruse a public library, do you grit your teeth at the humiliation at not being able to afford to send money to the newspaper for a back copy, as you pull out a periodical to xerox for a report that you have to turn in to your public school teacher? When you see people throwing frisbees at a public park, do you stick your head out your window and yell obscenities intermingled with commentaries regarding their obvious politico-social bent? If you walk the public beaches, does your mouth froth at the thought of all this valuable realestate wasted on the stupid masses who are really only good for usury?
You are just like the foolish russians after the revolution... but let me guess, your knowledge of history is so poor you cannot comprehend why the comparison is appropos.
Perhaps. But, then I've lost track of your offtopic babblings, and the unlikely possibility of my missing historical references is the least of your concerns. In any case, I will try to respond.
Egalitarianism is often cited as fascio-communistic by those who understand neither egalitarianism, fascism, or communism, but mistakenly
Or, the fellow could be living proof that the Superman mythos is reality, and a Bizarro world really exists. Where cars have square wheels and Matrix-3 sweeps the Oscars.
= 9J =
We could see Sauron, Morgoth, and Shelob's mama, Ungoliant. Remember, Sauron was a busy bee in the Silmarillion. However, that all depends on if the producers were intent to film the book as a series, and not only a handful of the stories into a single movie.
= 9J =