I do not know what there case may be against Red Hat etc.
If the distributions contain SCO IP because IBM transferred it to the "public project" then the claims against Red Hat etc will be straight royalty claims.
And I suspect that the GPL won't help because that is based on the presumption that the IP rights granted by the licence are available for the developer to give away.
If SCO show that IBM didn't have those rights to give away then neither did Red Hat etc.
I dunno what happened to the content then so here it is.
OK, by derivation
censor (n) Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
Self censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of themself, usually on moral grounds
For all the dictionary definitions let me say that the use of the term self-censorship in this context has been used for quite a while and is an accepted usage. Your initial post asked what the article had to do with censorship and I attempted to explain. I have obviously failed.
How many playwriters censor their own work?
I expect a heck of a lot do, especially those who live in countries with less of a tradition of free speech.
censor (n) Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
Self censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of themself, usually on moral grounds
For all the dictionary definitions let me say that the use of the term self-censorship in this context has been used for quite a while and is an accepted usage. Your initial post asked what the article had to do with censorship and I attempted to explain. I have obviously failed.
How many playwriters censor their own work?
I expect a heck of a lot do, especially those who live in countries with less of a tradition of free speech.
Censoring or censorship refers to prohibitions of activity as well as simple publication or speaking of words. For example the production of theatrical plays has long been a target of censors.
So the use of the term "self censoring" in the original article is quite clear. It refers to the act of a scientist deciding to not undertake particular research for ethical or moral reasons. That is what the original article has to do with censorship. You may have read the article but some of the bigger words are clearly beyond you.
Second
It is piss poor form in an argument to set up a proposition "walking down the street is a calculated risk" then when a reply is received, add qualifiers such as the street is full of bad men. It is even poorer to then suggest that the opponent has actually said that growing up in a dangerous neighbourhood is a lifestyle choice.
Be that as it may, my analogy still stands. If you walk down the street by yourself you alone are effected by your decision. Take the kids and puppies with you and its a different matter.
How can you attack someone with a weapon that reduces the earth and surrounding space into a 100km wide sphere of hyperdense matter. Where exactly do you stand when it is test fired.
I thought he was saying "If you're ever in a position to develop a gun which might kill everyone in the world when you fire it for the first time, perhaps you shouldn't."
We take a calculated risk everytime we walk down the street
No, that's a lifestyle choice unless you are realllllly concerned with the karmic wellbeing of car drivers. The calculated risk is to you alone.
A moral decision, an ethical choice or self-censorship is involved where you drive a bus load of children and warm puppies down that street which you suspect may be mined so you can get a blowjob from your favourite sex object if you make it to the other end.
It's amazing how people can believe in equal rights
It's quite clear that equal rights are meant to apply only to Americans. I mean it's the Constitution of the United States of America. The Courts have found in many cases that it has no application to non-US citizens. And this has just dawned on Ashcroft. He's worked out that if you strip someone of their citizenship, they have no rights. The man is fucking brilliant, isn't he. No wonder they rule the world.
As for If you are a good, educated programmer, you have nothing to worry about.
how about
except someone who will do it cheaper because they live in a country with a cost of living 25% of yours.
More talented but previously repressed is bullshit. Indian software engineers haven't been repressed for a long time.. They have developed to be as good as but not necessarily better than Americans. They are however cheaper.
And to say you have no one to blame but yourself. because the cost of living is lower in India is utter crap
Don't get me wrong, I'm not critical of your decision to go with openoffice. The problems you face with various versions of Word would face you in five years time with open office if at that time the latest version of openoffice has features that aren't currently supported and we all hope that there are some of those.
But that won't be a problem because you can keep all installations at the same level because they are free. So your main problem with MS product is MONEY. Now I know you have other problems with MS but the comments you made related to money as the problem. I understood that while reading your first post.
But you ended with the statement that Document compatibility was major factor in that decision."
So my comments were meant to suggest that the technical arguments you used against the MS products in that conclusion were more a secondary issue arising from the primary issue of cost.
I can beat up MS as good as the next guy but I'm also happy to critisise anti MS arguments that I think are wrong or misguided. Because I think if you gonna fight you might as well fight with appropriate weapons.
I agree totally. I expect this is part of a push by MS to get all business users into Professional rather than the mix of Professional (for anyone who needs Access) and Standard (everyone else)
F**k me I wish we could use some other example than Word and pdf as an alternative. pdf describes layout. XML describes data.
As an accountant I'm interested in the XML tags that tell me a number is an asset or a liability. I don't care if you want it printed in Tahoma or Wingdings A.
The only real problem will be if MS doesn't allow users to save in non-ms schema.
That would be truly anti-XML.
And as an Accountant I get pissed off when I get told by Quicken that their new versions will use XML extensively but in the next breath am told that "No, you won't be able to export transcaction data from your database except through smart tags." And I bet that will be limited.
Ever try to open an older works document in 'X' version of MS Office?
How about opening say, a Word 97/2000/XP doc in Office 95
The way I read the post in question the poster referred to the difficulty of opening in say Office 97 a document saved in the format of a later version say XP. As far as I know apart from one stupid upgrade a while back which they fixed, any MS office prog can save in the format appropriate to an earlier version. Please let me know where I'm wrong. (International version differences excepted)
Your examples are not on this point at all. As for Works, I can't remember the last time I got one of their documents to open in anything other than Works.
And Standardizing everyone (teachers, parents, students) on OpenOffice.org was the smartest thing we've ever done. Document compatibility was major factor in that decision. I mean seriously. Substitiute anything for OpenOffice.org and the thing still makes sense and is just as valid.
The point you miss is that apart from the embrace, extend, exterminate action on XML, this is an exercise by Microsoft to get all business users upgrading to Professional from Standard. Their argument will be that XML is probably overkill for home users who only type in Outlook Express anyway.
So if they do get above their station and think they need Office then Standard without XML and no Access is OK for them to do their typing and checkbook balancing on.
But if you are in business you need the Professional version with XML and Access and Professional prices.
If you treat them like a child until their 18th birthday, they're going to be set up for failure.
Treating someone like a child involves helping them to become an adult. Most parents hope that by the time the child is 18 it will have been achieved.
The other alternative persued by many 'parents' is to give the child the freedom to teach themselves or have the childs peer group provide the tuition. My observationis that this seldom works. At best they are socialized within their peer group only and have no concept of how to live in a world unlike that group.
But one important thing I have learnt as a parent is how utterly useless are generalizations (eg. children should be raised in an atmosphere of love and freedom) or specific rules (eg. you should never disciplin your children in public) about how children should be treated.
Each child is different from day one and most mistakes are made in treating them like children because they are children. I treat my children differently because they are different people.
even more importantly, to register it it has to be a car, not a pile of carbon.
Police oficer: Boy, do you realize you were doin' 80 in a 60 zone in that there unregistered pile of carbon dust. By the way, what sorta milage you git from it.
Lending officer: So Mr Nievelt, you want a loan to buy a car. You have just started a good job and in your application you list your only debts as your student loan.
Nievelt: Yeah, that's right.
Lending officer: We have run a credit check and I'm afraid it shows a debt of $96billion owed to the RIAA.
Nievelt:Oh shit, I'd forgotten about that. I mean they're taking it out of my pay and you tend to forget that sort of stuff.
Lending officer: Hard to forget $96billion I'd have thought. Do you expect to ever pay it back.
Nievelt: Oh no it'll be there till I die, for sure. But I think the RIAA has a policy on my life to cover it.
Lending officer: Oh, that's good. We may be able to help you in that case. Tell me, do they have any security for this debt.:
Nievelt: No, I don't own that much stuff.
Lending officer: Well the RIAA seem to have you by the balls forever don't they.
Nievelt: Yes, they have them too.
Lending officer: What.
Nievelt: My nuts. Part of the settlement. Had to sign a release and everything. Apparently they are still technically me cause you can't sell body parts. So I had to sign a release.
Slashdot Mirror
If the distributions contain SCO IP because IBM transferred it to the "public project" then the claims against Red Hat etc will be straight royalty claims.
And I suspect that the GPL won't help because that is based on the presumption that the IP rights granted by the licence are available for the developer to give away.
If SCO show that IBM didn't have those rights to give away then neither did Red Hat etc.
Well, we are all waiting for you to explain...
I thought you were going to make a crack about his name.
OK, by derivation
censor (n) Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
Self censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of themself, usually on moral grounds
For all the dictionary definitions let me say that the use of the term self-censorship in this context has been used for quite a while and is an accepted usage. Your initial post asked what the article had to do with censorship and I attempted to explain. I have obviously failed.
How many playwriters censor their own work?
I expect a heck of a lot do, especially those who live in countries with less of a tradition of free speech.
censor (n) Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of others, usually on moral grounds
Self censorship (n) the actions of Any person who controls or suppreses the behaviour of themself, usually on moral grounds
For all the dictionary definitions let me say that the use of the term self-censorship in this context has been used for quite a while and is an accepted usage. Your initial post asked what the article had to do with censorship and I attempted to explain. I have obviously failed.
How many playwriters censor their own work?
I expect a heck of a lot do, especially those who live in countries with less of a tradition of free speech.
Even if there is you just have to make sure you have your eyes closed when you open the box and CD.
First.
Censoring or censorship refers to prohibitions of activity as well as simple publication or speaking of words. For example the production of theatrical plays has long been a target of censors.
So the use of the term "self censoring" in the original article is quite clear. It refers to the act of a scientist deciding to not undertake particular research for ethical or moral reasons. That is what the original article has to do with censorship. You may have read the article but some of the bigger words are clearly beyond you.
Second
It is piss poor form in an argument to set up a proposition "walking down the street is a calculated risk" then when a reply is received, add qualifiers such as the street is full of bad men. It is even poorer to then suggest that the opponent has actually said that growing up in a dangerous neighbourhood is a lifestyle choice.
Be that as it may, my analogy still stands. If you walk down the street by yourself you alone are effected by your decision. Take the kids and puppies with you and its a different matter.
Most of the people round here would be safe enough.
How can you attack someone with a weapon that reduces the earth and surrounding space into a 100km wide sphere of hyperdense matter. Where exactly do you stand when it is test fired.
I thought he was saying "If you're ever in a position to develop a gun which might kill everyone in the world when you fire it for the first time, perhaps you shouldn't."
No, that's a lifestyle choice unless you are realllllly concerned with the karmic wellbeing of car drivers. The calculated risk is to you alone.
A moral decision, an ethical choice or self-censorship is involved where you drive a bus load of children and warm puppies down that street which you suspect may be mined so you can get a blowjob from your favourite sex object if you make it to the other end.
True only if you survive the first phase.
It's quite clear that equal rights are meant to apply only to Americans. I mean it's the Constitution of the United States of America. The Courts have found in many cases that it has no application to non-US citizens. And this has just dawned on Ashcroft. He's worked out that if you strip someone of their citizenship, they have no rights. The man is fucking brilliant, isn't he. No wonder they rule the world.
As for If you are a good, educated programmer, you have nothing to worry about.
how about
except someone who will do it cheaper because they live in a country with a cost of living 25% of yours.
More talented but previously repressed is bullshit. Indian software engineers haven't been repressed for a long time.. They have developed to be as good as but not necessarily better than Americans. They are however cheaper.
And to say you have no one to blame but yourself. because the cost of living is lower in India is utter crap
But that won't be a problem because you can keep all installations at the same level because they are free. So your main problem with MS product is MONEY. Now I know you have other problems with MS but the comments you made related to money as the problem. I understood that while reading your first post.
But you ended with the statement that Document compatibility was major factor in that decision."
So my comments were meant to suggest that the technical arguments you used against the MS products in that conclusion were more a secondary issue arising from the primary issue of cost.
I can beat up MS as good as the next guy but I'm also happy to critisise anti MS arguments that I think are wrong or misguided. Because I think if you gonna fight you might as well fight with appropriate weapons.
Someone will pay dearly for this...
I wasn't sure if I could get clearance for the sample.
Damn you scientists.
I agree totally. I expect this is part of a push by MS to get all business users into Professional rather than the mix of Professional (for anyone who needs Access) and Standard (everyone else)
Hel lo World
Ha Ha that's funny. I do a copy and paste on the text section and its got an extra space in the middle of the word Hello.
It looks like the spellchecker in 2003 Pro doesn't work yet either.
As an accountant I'm interested in the XML tags that tell me a number is an asset or a liability. I don't care if you want it printed in Tahoma or Wingdings A.
The only real problem will be if MS doesn't allow users to save in non-ms schema.
That would be truly anti-XML.
And as an Accountant I get pissed off when I get told by Quicken that their new versions will use XML extensively but in the next breath am told that "No, you won't be able to export transcaction data from your database except through smart tags." And I bet that will be limited.
How about opening say, a Word 97/2000/XP doc in Office 95
The way I read the post in question the poster referred to the difficulty of opening in say Office 97 a document saved in the format of a later version say XP. As far as I know apart from one stupid upgrade a while back which they fixed, any MS office prog can save in the format appropriate to an earlier version. Please let me know where I'm wrong. (International version differences excepted)
Your examples are not on this point at all. As for Works, I can't remember the last time I got one of their documents to open in anything other than Works.
And Standardizing everyone (teachers, parents, students) on OpenOffice.org was the smartest thing we've ever done. Document compatibility was major factor in that decision. I mean seriously. Substitiute anything for OpenOffice.org and the thing still makes sense and is just as valid.
So if they do get above their station and think they need Office then Standard without XML and no Access is OK for them to do their typing and checkbook balancing on.
But if you are in business you need the Professional version with XML and Access and Professional prices.
Treating someone like a child involves helping them to become an adult. Most parents hope that by the time the child is 18 it will have been achieved.
The other alternative persued by many 'parents' is to give the child the freedom to teach themselves or have the childs peer group provide the tuition. My observationis that this seldom works. At best they are socialized within their peer group only and have no concept of how to live in a world unlike that group.
But one important thing I have learnt as a parent is how utterly useless are generalizations (eg. children should be raised in an atmosphere of love and freedom) or specific rules (eg. you should never disciplin your children in public) about how children should be treated.
Each child is different from day one and most mistakes are made in treating them like children because they are children. I treat my children differently because they are different people.
Police oficer: Boy, do you realize you were doin' 80 in a 60 zone in that there unregistered pile of carbon dust. By the way, what sorta milage you git from it.
Lending officer: So Mr Nievelt, you want a loan to buy a car. You have just started a good job and in your application you list your only debts as your student loan.
Nievelt: Yeah, that's right.
Lending officer: We have run a credit check and I'm afraid it shows a debt of $96billion owed to the RIAA.
Nievelt:Oh shit, I'd forgotten about that. I mean they're taking it out of my pay and you tend to forget that sort of stuff.
Lending officer: Hard to forget $96billion I'd have thought. Do you expect to ever pay it back.
Nievelt: Oh no it'll be there till I die, for sure. But I think the RIAA has a policy on my life to cover it.
Lending officer: Oh, that's good. We may be able to help you in that case. Tell me, do they have any security for this debt.:
Nievelt: No, I don't own that much stuff.
Lending officer: Well the RIAA seem to have you by the balls forever don't they.
Nievelt: Yes, they have them too.
Lending officer: What.
Nievelt: My nuts. Part of the settlement. Had to sign a release and everything. Apparently they are still technically me cause you can't sell body parts. So I had to sign a release.
Lending officer: A release for what.
Nievelt: The anti-piracy ads.