I'm glad that Perens is pushing for this. I agree with him that Debian rocks. It rocks so well that even GPL-hater, and ex-CEO nutcase Ranson Love can't stay away from it. You'd think that can't possibly be good for Linux, and you'd be right. But, with UserLinux around, even Love, idiot that he is, can't do much to derail it.
Actually, they distribute their code to Sony, Philips &c, so I don't suppose they have to give me, the end user, source for anything.
Actually, if GPL'd binaries were distributed to you (inside Tivo) they do have to give you the sourcecode, or at least make it freely accessible to you from a common access point (ftp, web..etc.). I don't have a Tivo, and I'm not interested in getting one, but I thought I read somewhere that the code was supposed to be on the settop's hard-drive. I could be wrong.
My problem with grabbing a post-1989 ash is that I can't be sure that GPL'd code from busybox hasn't leaked over into the FreeBSD version.
If your intent is to close the source, then you do have a dilema. As you probably don't have a horde of rabid lawyers at hand, I only see 2 choices: 1) use a GPL'd version, but load it dynamically, 2) staying with the pre-1990 version, or 3) purchasing a proprietary closed-source alternative that allows access to source for closer binding and royalty free distribution.
You might see how openness would be hard to manage. I think if we put source code up on our website & didn't point out in big red letters what cameras it runs on, we might be OK, but if a big hacker community grows up around one of the cameras (which is exactly what Flashpoint was trying to do- very cool & too bad they didn't make it), they could get uncomfortable.
I'm not sure I understand the issue. You have a place to put the altered sourcecode (for different cameras), but you think there will be problems? Please clarify. Also, if the people who you distribute the binaries too are ODMs, and not the general public, then those are the only people who have the right to expect the sourcecode under the GPL. You are not required to publish the work for the whole world to see (a common misconception of the GPL). You see, it is then up to those ODMs to give their customers (the OEMs) the sourcecode if they distribute the binaries. It is no longer your issue as long as you only distribute binaries and source to the ODMs (your clients). Finally, if the OEMs distribute the binaries to their customers, they too are bound by the GPL and must distribute the code.
After re-reading your comment, I think what you are implying is that you would like the code to remain a secret, leaving the ODMs/OEMs dependent on you for code that you have gotten for free. If I have this right, then this is your company's strength and its achilles heal. In that case, I would discourage the use of the GPL, and only use Open Source products with the weakest possible licenses, such as the BSD. If there aren't any that haven't been affected by GPL'd code, then I suggest paying for a closed source alternative or continue developing your own. You've already come to the proper conclusion.
BSD is a safer way for embedded systems until someone clarifies "work" and "mere aggregation."
BSD is an excellent choice for the moment, as Linux has only recenly surpassed it. BSD still has a few years left before becoming antiquated due to companies only taking from it (and reselling it in closed form to ODMs and OEMs) and not returning their innovations back to the pool due to jealous attempts to guard revenue. GPL'd software is viral in nature, and has a momentum which established business models can't outflank. If you don't use GPL'd software and your competitor does, in a few years your BSD-based closed source product won't even be in the same league. It will still be the solid BSD of 2004, but will not have the same contributions as Linux in 2009. Unfortunately, your company's business model of hiding source dissallows for the use of the GPL.
I predicted Novell Linux in 1998-99 to the amusement of several network engineers, I wouldn't mind seeing their faces now. I also predict a MS-Linux in the near future.
I can contribute back whatever I want and know what? I will because I want to help out but also because I get to find
I'm a geek, and I really don't care about choice...Security, stability, reliability, etc. is all great, but the ease-of-use and the features are still lacking.
No offense, but you don't sound like a geek. I mean a geek would say something like...
Who're you calling a geek?! Just 'cause I like having choices...bugger "ease-of-use" and leave it to the Macintoids who don't have any choice. Security, stability, reliability and performance is what I find great.
How could Time pull this one on the public?!! They're here to defend the truth, not break it.
It goes to show the immense influence government agents have over mainstream media. The biggest lie of this decade is that the media is liberal. In the televised news world, CNN is also known to be heavily influenced by government agents, and Fox News is a lost cause.
The Memory Hole should be rewarded for their vigilance against lies from mainstream media. Sadly, most people think that mainstream media will protect them from government abuse by reporting on those abuses. Yet, Time has proven that as a corporate animal it is obviously too immature to ensure its own good conduct. What we need is a news organization that operates on democratic, not strictly capitalistic principles. Raw capitalism is fine for most organizations. But, news, worthy news, is not one of them. A democratic organization must be behind the news broadcast or print, not a bottom-line oriented organization. Think of Ben Franklin as the person who started a newspaper for the cause of man, not the image of Ben on that greenback which has the ability to alter the truth so readily.
Unconsciously, we also do simple things very quickly. So quick, that when these simple things happen in a sequence, they appear to be one complex activity. Most people don't realize this, but they even perform these lightning fast simple things concurrently. If they didn't, everyday would be a series of accidents leading from your driveway to your parking spot at work.
Is it any wonder that when some people recognize the similarity between the simple things that computers can do and the simple things that people can do, that they would want to extend computers in a way that resembles the complexity of human abilities? This isn't to say that the simple things are identical; clearly they aren't. But, the similarity lies in the idea that they can both do simple things. And, if one can easily (unconsciously) perform seemingly complex activities, why not the other?
A good reference for the driving analogy can be found here.
Alice in Wonderland is in the public domain. Peter Zelchenko made an ebook out of it with nice typography and claims copyright on the derived work. Can I cut the text & paste it into a document of mine?
IANAL. As far as I know, not even the actual author and creator of the work can take it out of public domain once it's there. Zelchenko can ask money for it (it would be silly to pay for something he didn't), but typography is not an extension or derivation of the original work. It's the original work in a different package. Packaging is also not a derivation of the original work. If he were to add his own graphic pictures within the text, he could copyright those and prevent you from copying the images, but the original text is still available to you if he posts it publically.
If I want a later version than my 1989 one, I run the risk of hitting the part of the timeline where GPL contributions began.
Yes, you do. But, I have to ask: so what? Just don't bind their source to yours and you'll be fine in using the product. Or, you can even bind their source to yours, but don't distribute the binaries outside your "organization". Better yet, stop thinking like Microsoft or Linksys and contribute back to those whose work and sweat you've borrowed from, and work with the GPL. The product you've borrowed and extended will be much improved, and the next person who thinks its worth his time (now that its a nicer product after you worked on it) may find it worth the while to extend/stabilize it further, and you get an even NICER product. You can even add the project to your resume as you are now a co-author of a tool used by many peers. That's the GPL for ya.
Jesus, Bill, if you're posting on/., who's running MacroShaft? Your robotic employees might starting forming their own opinions without you behind the whip. What the hell were you thinking?
I commend you on an excellent analysis of the author's intent. I feel you have also correctly identified the core issue of the need for liberal arts in today's society. A society where information is the primary form of currency, not gold. However, I believe that several responses to your post are also correct in their suggestion of combining the theoretical understanding of the arts with a practical application that specifically excercises those arts as skills. It may be that the issuance of a bachelor's degree in the liberal arts may be more appropriately deserved by an additional graded year in practical service where those skills can be applied. Although, this is unlikely to happen, and would be undesireable for the majority of students who prefer a speedy graduation to actual learning.
As an aside, I've always thought that the addition of another course or subject would have benefited the liberal arts study. As strange as this may sound, I believe that most students who enter college would benefit from a very practical four year course of how to study. A series of courses that would help students to the gain most from the other courses. Perhaps, the course could even focus on the much neglected skill of memorization. Stranger is that this is a subject not taught in public elementary or high-schools (they may be taught in private prepatory schools, though I wouldn't know). This is all fantasy of course, as people generally think they don't require assistance in learning. Sadly, most grades reflect the opposite.
"
Many professions require some form of computer programming. Accountants program spreadsheets and word processors; photographers program photo editors; musicians program synthesizers; and professional programmers instruct plain computers. Programming has become a required skill.
Yet programming is more than just a vocational skill. Indeed, good programming is a fun activity, a creative outlet, and a way to express abstract ideas in a tangible form. And designing programs teaches a variety of skills that are important in all kinds of professions: critical reading, analytical thinking, creative synthesis, and attention to detail.
We therefore believe that the study of program design deserves the same central role in general education as mathematics and English. Or, put more succinctly, everyone should learn how to design programs.
On one hand, program design teaches the same analytical skills as mathematics. But, unlike mathematics, working with programs is an active approach to learning. Interacting with software provides immediate feedback and thus leads to exploration, experimentation, and self-evaluation. Furthermore, designing programs produces useful and fun things, which vastly increases the sense of accomplishment when compared to drill exercises in mathematics. On the other hand, program design teaches the same analytical reading and writing skills as English. Even the smallest programming tasks are formulated as word problems. Without critical reading skills, a student cannot design programs that match the specification. Conversely, good program design methods force a student to articulate thoughts about programs in proper English.
This book is the first book on programming as the core subject of a liberal arts education. Its main focus is the design process tha
If I remember correctly, eDirectory's client SDK is based on OpenLDAP's client software libraries. They probably share the same source. Theoretically, this means that you can write an application that accesses either OpenLDAP or eDirectory services without having to alter your sourcecode as long as you adhere to either server's LDAP API.
Just based on reading some articles in the past, eDirectory probably has some technical and ease-of-use advantages over OpenLDAP, but that may disappear in a few years.
I haven't really felt the need to see the two sequels as I thought the first movie was complete in itself, and they could only spoil the story by stretching it out. Aside from the breakthrough special effects, the best thing about (and the main point of) the first movie was introducing the uncertainty and possible illusion of "reality" to the mass market in an entertaining way. Dark City was another attempt at that but didn't get a larger audience. We Can Remember It for You Wholesale (a.k.a Total Recall) did it in a fun and paranoid manner that's to be expected from Phillip K Dick.
I haven't seen the sequels and I'm probably off the mark on this, but I think the concept of reality as illusion is too abstract and disturbing for most people (read studio executives). So, I wonder if the sequels may have focused too much on special effects and over the top action scenes without returning to the essential, and intriguing, reasons behind the effects and amazing action: Neo's discovery of, and learning about, alternative realities. "You think that's air you're breathing now?" - Morpheus
If you think about it, Neo only explored three or four realities in the first movie. There are an infinite number they could've continued on to in the sequels, but they probably lose the advantage of the first film's conspirational tension before the first illusion was revealed.
I hope film producers eventually discover Roger Zelazny as they've discovered Phillip K Dick. He wrote about reality from various angles from the Amber series to Hindu/Buddhist (The Lord of Light) and Egytian (Creatures of Light and Darkness) religions, and more.
Anyways, I think I'll wait until the DVDs come out for the sequels. The experience will probably be improved with beer in hand.
A patent guarantees you a limited monopoly for a period of time (unless challenged and overturned). However, it does not license you to violate monopoly laws, or protect you from prosecution and penalties when you do.
Almost everyone buys gasoline but gasoline isn't a monopoly.
...to illustrate a mistaken notion that Microsoft and its Windows product do not hold a monopoly.
Being a monopoly in itself is neither bad nor good. It is a state where the laws governing your business are different from the laws governing other non-monopoly businesses.
Operating systems aren't like cars, you can't have a monopoly because you don't need one for anything.
Not sure what you're stating that you don't need...a car or an Operating System? In any case, you don't really really need anything. Just an atmosphere and sustenance. A roof over your head is optional. If you're talking about actually working in today's age, I doubt you could find a job where an Operating System wasn't essential (even at the burger joint though you may not know it). If you're talking about cars not being essential, driving to work for millions of Americans isn't an option, it's how they earn their sustenace.
As for the denial of Microsoft being a monopoly...at least two courts have found them guilty of abusing that monopoly and breaking those laws. A third court may very well actually punish them for it.
You'd be better off if you went outside to play and healthier too.
If your brand-new shiny car (Dell, Gateway, Compaq, HP...etc) was only allowed to run on my gas (Windows, Office, IE..etc) and I was the only gas-station (warranty, phone support, services, patches) you could visit to support that car (Dell...etc), would I be a monopoly? Sure, you could take that brand new car (Dell..etc) and put other people's gas (Linux, BSD..etc) in it. But, don't expect to be welcome back to my filling station (warranty, support, services) cause my gas-supplier (Microsoft) won't like it and may cut me off. And, since he's the biggest player on the block (think OPEC in the 70s), I'm not willing to piss him off for your convenience since you (Aunt Betty, mother, grandma, overworked parent) barely know how to drive to begin with.
The conservatives (really the wrong name in this case as conservation isn't their deal) who argue that global warming is a liberal plot are reminiscent of the unfortunate citizens of Hy-Brasil as it quickly sinks in Eric The Viking. Remember, as the water starts collecting around your ankles, "Stay calm! This is NOT happening...I've already appointed the Chancellor as Chairman of a committee to find out exactly what IS going on, and meantime I suggest we have a sing-song!"
NetWare is a widely known name brand. People just can't buy that kind of mindshare. It only comes from years of proving your worth.
They should keep the name and apply it to their new Linux-based NetWare. They can call the old product NetWare Classic to let people know there's a new kid wearing the old name.
There are still companies out there that have respect for the NetWare name, and Novell would be foolish to disregard that capital. They could even skip the versioning and go right to NetWare X for the new series of Linux servers wrapped in NetWare services.
Maybe the chemo weakened their immune system to such a state that this virus was able to take a foot-hold in their body long enough to attack the cancer cells. When the cancer was gone, the immune system bounced back and no more virus - Hallelujah!
You fool. You sorry sorry fool. You have no idea how good you have it.
Maybe not. But, I have an idea of how good it should be, and we're not there. Don't take offense if it seems to me that you have no idea how bad we have it from just a few short years ago.
Until you've seen the face of a person terrified at the idea of meeting any police, or a person shaking after getting a ticket, or a person afraid to talk to anyone in government, then you should talk.
I can guess by your lack of experience that you're without a permanent tan and haven't been pulled out of line by airport security for having one. Not through any fault of yours, as we are all birthed in our skin by chance. I would submit that freedom isn't a state of being, but a continuous struggle against those who hypocritically only value their own rights while disregarding yours. Freedom isn't very anything. It simply is or isn't happening. It can start or it can stop. The freedom to access a lawyer when your arrest has been categorized as a "terrorist action" has stopped.
We are free. We are very free. You can walk up to the White House and picket it. You can drive your truck with a rifle in the back. You can say what you want on the Internet. You can read the books you want.
Anyone can do any of the things you've mentioned and more. It is simply a matter of the consequences that becomes the deterence to those activities. Even expressing yourself on the internet can be a dangerous proposition. To keep this reply short and educational, I'll simply point you to a source you can learn from.
Even if another terrorist attack occurs, do you think they're going to take these liberties away? No. The government won't. In fact, they can't. Because people like myself speak up and let people like you know what is going on.
You're statement has a naivete that is almost charming. On the other hand, it is also a sad indictment of our public schools' failure to teachhistory in any meaningfulmanner. This failure is one the reasons why historical events repeat themselves in such tight, short cycles in the U.S., which is reflected so heavily in our foreignpolicies.
Our founding fathers knew what they were doing a hell of a lot better than you give them credit for.
I give them all the credit. Many of them are my heroes. Unfortunately, they are dead. The dead cannot defend their dreams. Its up to you and me to defend them at home, so that bad things don't happen to other people.
...in a Freedom of Information Act requested document is censorship. It is also the only proof required in arguing that the U.S. Department of inJustice is working against the citizens of the United States and not for them. This is not a game; this is an affront against the public.
Slashdot Mirror
= 9J =
= 9J =
Actually, if GPL'd binaries were distributed to you (inside Tivo) they do have to give you the sourcecode, or at least make it freely accessible to you from a common access point (ftp, web..etc.). I don't have a Tivo, and I'm not interested in getting one, but I thought I read somewhere that the code was supposed to be on the settop's hard-drive. I could be wrong.
My problem with grabbing a post-1989 ash is that I can't be sure that GPL'd code from busybox hasn't leaked over into the FreeBSD version.
If your intent is to close the source, then you do have a dilema. As you probably don't have a horde of rabid lawyers at hand, I only see 2 choices: 1) use a GPL'd version, but load it dynamically, 2) staying with the pre-1990 version, or 3) purchasing a proprietary closed-source alternative that allows access to source for closer binding and royalty free distribution.
You might see how openness would be hard to manage. I think if we put source code up on our website & didn't point out in big red letters what cameras it runs on, we might be OK, but if a big hacker community grows up around one of the cameras (which is exactly what Flashpoint was trying to do- very cool & too bad they didn't make it), they could get uncomfortable.
I'm not sure I understand the issue. You have a place to put the altered sourcecode (for different cameras), but you think there will be problems? Please clarify. Also, if the people who you distribute the binaries too are ODMs, and not the general public, then those are the only people who have the right to expect the sourcecode under the GPL. You are not required to publish the work for the whole world to see (a common misconception of the GPL). You see, it is then up to those ODMs to give their customers (the OEMs) the sourcecode if they distribute the binaries. It is no longer your issue as long as you only distribute binaries and source to the ODMs (your clients). Finally, if the OEMs distribute the binaries to their customers, they too are bound by the GPL and must distribute the code.
After re-reading your comment, I think what you are implying is that you would like the code to remain a secret, leaving the ODMs/OEMs dependent on you for code that you have gotten for free. If I have this right, then this is your company's strength and its achilles heal. In that case, I would discourage the use of the GPL, and only use Open Source products with the weakest possible licenses, such as the BSD. If there aren't any that haven't been affected by GPL'd code, then I suggest paying for a closed source alternative or continue developing your own. You've already come to the proper conclusion.
BSD is a safer way for embedded systems until someone clarifies "work" and "mere aggregation."
BSD is an excellent choice for the moment, as Linux has only recenly surpassed it. BSD still has a few years left before becoming antiquated due to companies only taking from it (and reselling it in closed form to ODMs and OEMs) and not returning their innovations back to the pool due to jealous attempts to guard revenue. GPL'd software is viral in nature, and has a momentum which established business models can't outflank. If you don't use GPL'd software and your competitor does, in a few years your BSD-based closed source product won't even be in the same league. It will still be the solid BSD of 2004, but will not have the same contributions as Linux in 2009. Unfortunately, your company's business model of hiding source dissallows for the use of the GPL.
I predicted Novell Linux in 1998-99 to the amusement of several network engineers, I wouldn't mind seeing their faces now. I also predict a MS-Linux in the near future.
I can contribute back whatever I want and know what? I will because I want to help out but also because I get to find
No offense, but you don't sound like a geek. I mean a geek would say something like...
Who're you calling a geek?! Just 'cause I like having choices...bugger "ease-of-use" and leave it to the Macintoids who don't have any choice. Security, stability, reliability and performance is what I find great.
You might reconsider your self-categorization.
= 9J =
It goes to show the immense influence government agents have over mainstream media. The biggest lie of this decade is that the media is liberal. In the televised news world, CNN is also known to be heavily influenced by government agents, and Fox News is a lost cause.
The Memory Hole should be rewarded for their vigilance against lies from mainstream media. Sadly, most people think that mainstream media will protect them from government abuse by reporting on those abuses. Yet, Time has proven that as a corporate animal it is obviously too immature to ensure its own good conduct. What we need is a news organization that operates on democratic, not strictly capitalistic principles. Raw capitalism is fine for most organizations. But, news, worthy news, is not one of them. A democratic organization must be behind the news broadcast or print, not a bottom-line oriented organization. Think of Ben Franklin as the person who started a newspaper for the cause of man, not the image of Ben on that greenback which has the ability to alter the truth so readily.
Get your democratic news here and here.
= 9J =
Is it any wonder that when some people recognize the similarity between the simple things that computers can do and the simple things that people can do, that they would want to extend computers in a way that resembles the complexity of human abilities? This isn't to say that the simple things are identical; clearly they aren't. But, the similarity lies in the idea that they can both do simple things. And, if one can easily (unconsciously) perform seemingly complex activities, why not the other?
A good reference for the driving analogy can be found here.
= 9J =
IANAL. As far as I know, not even the actual author and creator of the work can take it out of public domain once it's there. Zelchenko can ask money for it (it would be silly to pay for something he didn't), but typography is not an extension or derivation of the original work. It's the original work in a different package. Packaging is also not a derivation of the original work. If he were to add his own graphic pictures within the text, he could copyright those and prevent you from copying the images, but the original text is still available to you if he posts it publically.
If I want a later version than my 1989 one, I run the risk of hitting the part of the timeline where GPL contributions began.
Yes, you do. But, I have to ask: so what? Just don't bind their source to yours and you'll be fine in using the product. Or, you can even bind their source to yours, but don't distribute the binaries outside your "organization". Better yet, stop thinking like Microsoft or Linksys and contribute back to those whose work and sweat you've borrowed from, and work with the GPL. The product you've borrowed and extended will be much improved, and the next person who thinks its worth his time (now that its a nicer product after you worked on it) may find it worth the while to extend/stabilize it further, and you get an even NICER product. You can even add the project to your resume as you are now a co-author of a tool used by many peers. That's the GPL for ya.
= 9J =
Why not just capture 100% of the noontime sun now on the ground? That's 5 times more power, and probably trillions of dollars cheaper.
= 9J =
= 9J =
As an aside, I've always thought that the addition of another course or subject would have benefited the liberal arts study. As strange as this may sound, I believe that most students who enter college would benefit from a very practical four year course of how to study. A series of courses that would help students to the gain most from the other courses. Perhaps, the course could even focus on the much neglected skill of memorization. Stranger is that this is a subject not taught in public elementary or high-schools (they may be taught in private prepatory schools, though I wouldn't know). This is all fantasy of course, as people generally think they don't require assistance in learning. Sadly, most grades reflect the opposite.
I recently found a free online book from MIT Press which mentions some of your concerns in the book's preface. I thought you, and others with similar concerns would be interested in reading How to Design Programs: An Introduction to Computing and Programming.
Here's an excerpt from the Preface:
" Many professions require some form of computer programming. Accountants program spreadsheets and word processors; photographers program photo editors; musicians program synthesizers; and professional programmers instruct plain computers. Programming has become a required skill.
Yet programming is more than just a vocational skill. Indeed, good programming is a fun activity, a creative outlet, and a way to express abstract ideas in a tangible form. And designing programs teaches a variety of skills that are important in all kinds of professions: critical reading, analytical thinking, creative synthesis, and attention to detail.
We therefore believe that the study of program design deserves the same central role in general education as mathematics and English. Or, put more succinctly, everyone should learn how to design programs.
On one hand, program design teaches the same analytical skills as mathematics. But, unlike mathematics, working with programs is an active approach to learning. Interacting with software provides immediate feedback and thus leads to exploration, experimentation, and self-evaluation. Furthermore, designing programs produces useful and fun things, which vastly increases the sense of accomplishment when compared to drill exercises in mathematics. On the other hand, program design teaches the same analytical reading and writing skills as English. Even the smallest programming tasks are formulated as word problems. Without critical reading skills, a student cannot design programs that match the specification. Conversely, good program design methods force a student to articulate thoughts about programs in proper English.
This book is the first book on programming as the core subject of a liberal arts education. Its main focus is the design process tha
Just based on reading some articles in the past, eDirectory probably has some technical and ease-of-use advantages over OpenLDAP, but that may disappear in a few years.
= 9J =
I haven't seen the sequels and I'm probably off the mark on this, but I think the concept of reality as illusion is too abstract and disturbing for most people (read studio executives). So, I wonder if the sequels may have focused too much on special effects and over the top action scenes without returning to the essential, and intriguing, reasons behind the effects and amazing action: Neo's discovery of, and learning about, alternative realities. "You think that's air you're breathing now?" - Morpheus
If you think about it, Neo only explored three or four realities in the first movie. There are an infinite number they could've continued on to in the sequels, but they probably lose the advantage of the first film's conspirational tension before the first illusion was revealed.
I hope film producers eventually discover Roger Zelazny as they've discovered Phillip K Dick. He wrote about reality from various angles from the Amber series to Hindu/Buddhist (The Lord of Light) and Egytian (Creatures of Light and Darkness) religions, and more.
Anyways, I think I'll wait until the DVDs come out for the sequels. The experience will probably be improved with beer in hand.
= 9J =
= 9J =
Almost everyone buys gasoline but gasoline isn't a monopoly.
Being a monopoly in itself is neither bad nor good. It is a state where the laws governing your business are different from the laws governing other non-monopoly businesses.
Operating systems aren't like cars, you can't have a monopoly because you don't need one for anything.
Not sure what you're stating that you don't need...a car or an Operating System? In any case, you don't really really need anything. Just an atmosphere and sustenance. A roof over your head is optional. If you're talking about actually working in today's age, I doubt you could find a job where an Operating System wasn't essential (even at the burger joint though you may not know it). If you're talking about cars not being essential, driving to work for millions of Americans isn't an option, it's how they earn their sustenace.
As for the denial of Microsoft being a monopoly...at least two courts have found them guilty of abusing that monopoly and breaking those laws. A third court may very well actually punish them for it.
You'd be better off if you went outside to play and healthier too.
I agree, we should all take that advice.
= 9J =
= 9J =
The conservatives (really the wrong name in this case as conservation isn't their deal) who argue that global warming is a liberal plot are reminiscent of the unfortunate citizens of Hy-Brasil as it quickly sinks in Eric The Viking. Remember, as the water starts collecting around your ankles, "Stay calm! This is NOT happening...I've already appointed the Chancellor as Chairman of a committee to find out exactly what IS going on, and meantime I suggest we have a sing-song!"
= 9J =
They should keep the name and apply it to their new Linux-based NetWare. They can call the old product NetWare Classic to let people know there's a new kid wearing the old name.
There are still companies out there that have respect for the NetWare name, and Novell would be foolish to disregard that capital. They could even skip the versioning and go right to NetWare X for the new series of Linux servers wrapped in NetWare services.
= 9J =
Maybe the chemo weakened their immune system to such a state that this virus was able to take a foot-hold in their body long enough to attack the cancer cells. When the cancer was gone, the immune system bounced back and no more virus - Hallelujah!
This is really quite exciting.
= 9J =
= 9J =
Maybe these guys know how to get on the list.
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
Maybe not. But, I have an idea of how good it should be, and we're not there. Don't take offense if it seems to me that you have no idea how bad we have it from just a few short years ago.
Until you've seen the face of a person terrified at the idea of meeting any police, or a person shaking after getting a ticket, or a person afraid to talk to anyone in government, then you should talk.
I can guess by your lack of experience that you're without a permanent tan and haven't been pulled out of line by airport security for having one. Not through any fault of yours, as we are all birthed in our skin by chance. I would submit that freedom isn't a state of being, but a continuous struggle against those who hypocritically only value their own rights while disregarding yours. Freedom isn't very anything. It simply is or isn't happening. It can start or it can stop. The freedom to access a lawyer when your arrest has been categorized as a "terrorist action" has stopped.
We are free. We are very free. You can walk up to the White House and picket it. You can drive your truck with a rifle in the back. You can say what you want on the Internet. You can read the books you want.
Anyone can do any of the things you've mentioned and more. It is simply a matter of the consequences that becomes the deterence to those activities. Even expressing yourself on the internet can be a dangerous proposition. To keep this reply short and educational, I'll simply point you to a source you can learn from.
Even if another terrorist attack occurs, do you think they're going to take these liberties away? No. The government won't. In fact, they can't. Because people like myself speak up and let people like you know what is going on.
You're statement has a naivete that is almost charming. On the other hand, it is also a sad indictment of our public schools' failure to teach history in any meaningful manner. This failure is one the reasons why historical events repeat themselves in such tight, short cycles in the U.S., which is reflected so heavily in our foreign policies.
Our founding fathers knew what they were doing a hell of a lot better than you give them credit for.
I give them all the credit. Many of them are my heroes. Unfortunately, they are dead. The dead cannot defend their dreams. Its up to you and me to defend them at home, so that bad things don't happen to other people.
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =