And when has the UN EVER 'mandated' an invasion? They've been an organization of peace and diplomacy; however they have failed miserably at protecting nations under their union. They tend to fare towards setting up a committee that requires years of investigation rather than deal with the immediate military threat to a nation's sovereignty. Even then, the committee itself is usually a farce because the members are not exactly 'neutral' in nature. They bind themselves to rules of conduct which dictators like Saddam Hussein don't live by then curse the US for acting; meanwhile tens of thousands Iraqis die while Blixie takes 9 months to write an unsubstantiated report that they 'may have' WMD; wait, maybe not....we're still not sure. Either way, the US is condemned for their actions or lack thereof. It's lose, lose. The US has always been held to a higher standard on the international level with very little accountability for other UN members. They usually sit on the sidelines and either cheer or hiss, but most are protected when they ask for help by the US. Personally, I'd rather see the US just back out of not only the UN, but the international scene altogether. I know it's not feasible, but it would be interesting to see how most of these member nations would fare without US strength in the UN and the military / financial might we can bring to the table. Maybe the next time a dictator like Saddam rolls around we should sit it out and let the other 50+ nations that disagreed with us on Iraq sort it out. That, too, will be unlikely because a member nation will come to the Whitehouse crying about being invaded and our prez will cave in. Too bad we probably will not collect on the war debt, either; we seldom do. So, you can cry illegal all you want. You can protest all you want. You can boycott all you want. Just remember your words and actions the next time the US needs to help a country that truly needs it; and what would happen if that help was not available.
I love these debates. Would you still pay $20 for a cd knowing the artist got 50%? Do you even care how much the artist(s) make? $20 spent is $20 gone; regardless of the recipient.
Maybe that's part of the reason why Windows users don't switch. They are referred to as fucking newbs. How would you like to be the outsider looking in; truly interested in a better system and be called names and insulted? Just a thought.
I would tend to agree but being an engineer you should learn VERY slowly the quickest way between two points is NOT always a straight line; especially in the IT world. Engineers pretty much depend on the functions of IT personnel to the extent of installing their software correctly and keeping the data safe because they have no choice. Given the opportunity, Engineers would be more secure about their own data than trusting it to an outside source. IT can ride whatever wave they want.....but it's the good old floppy or CD that TRULY keeps the data secure.
I'm not especially a MS fan but if companies were not out to make a buck none of us would have jobs. I'm not talking CEO status here (although that has a great impact in the bigger picture), however how long do you think a company losing money can support its staff? As a quality manager, I get into this debate on a regular basis with our sales staff and business unit manager because of profit margins. Apparently they'd rather tape a nickel to each part we sell rather than lose an account. That's completely ludicrous. That means each time we fulfill an order we lose money; and also pisses off the employees because they have not had a raise in 2 years. Jeez, I wonder why. Sure, it's up to us as a business to MAKE ourselves profitable but there inevitably comes a time where we have to tell the customer: "We can't sell you this product anymore because we're losing money'. It's a hard pill to swallow, but I'd rather be part of a 1 million dollar profitable company than a 1 billion dollar company that's losing money left and right; regardless of the corporation name. All this talk on Slashdot about 'free' (music, software, videos, etc) does not create jobs. One could argue IT positions (which is a very small percentage of most viable business models) but what if there's no company to work for? Then what? We'll all be able to enjoy reading Slashdot from a sidewalk by stealing someone else's bandwidth via a Wi-Fi on Main Street. I don't claim to have all the answers but I certainly know how to ask the right questions.
There is a difference between 'willing' and 'harassed'. If I were to get an abortion, I would not be 'willing' to be 'harassed' by the protestors outside the clinic. Same concept here; I may want the service but not the hassles of the self-righteous persons yelling at me to comply with their religious beliefs. Just MHO.
California has been a joke for quite some time now. I still can't believe they have one of the most electoral votes states in the union when they offer 'semi' voting privelages to non-registered voters in the form of bills giving health compensation to non-residents who have children born in the US. Try to explain THAT one to someone who lives in Wisconsin and has raised a family with one of the highest tax rates in the country and can't afford health insurance. Like you said; it's a joke.
1. Penises....go to Venice Beach; you'll disagree. 2. Credit ratings....check out the state budget. 3. Mortgages....where else can I get beachfront property for $1m a square foot? Sounds like a deal.
I read the link and nowhere does it say that 'file sharing' is illegal; it all refers to copyright...same as here in the US. If I write a paper and distribute it on Kaaza I'm still 'file sharing' but I have not broken any laws.
"Blinded by the truth" and "flag waving". Huh, the last time I saw a Canadian flag waving in the breeze (in person OR on the news) was in front of the UN. I personally don't have anything against Canadians but when I hear rhetoric like yours it pisses me off. If you feel like the UN will solve all the world's problems then by all means sign on to the fallacy that a bunch of committee ridden diplomats can sit in a chair 3000 miles away from any given conflict and even BEGIN to understand the issues of a military state. When party countries ask for military assistance the UN forms a "committee" to investigate for 2 years before coming to the conclusion that it's "sovereignty" issue. By that time, the assistance isn't needed or wanted because someone like Hitler has already taken power and thousands if not millions of people have died. The UN is like the American Union....they've outlasted their usefulness. They serve no real purpose outside of having a representative. Even then, is that important? There are veto powers in the UN which the US and Great Britain chose to ignore with other dissenting opinions; did that stop us? What REAL power does the UN hold? It only holds the power of the most militaristic entity in its union which is in fact, the US. If that, indeed, is world opinion, then I say pull American forces EVERYWHERE; Europe, Asia, Africa......let's see how the world fares WITHOUT our assistance, or money for that matter. The tune seems to change diplomatically when the US threatens to pull financing for food, guns or social programs for some third world (or not so third world) countries. I, personally am sick and tired of the US being labeled the 'bad guy' in all matters of state. Let Canada fend for themselves on the world map and we'll just protect our borders. Seems like an even trade to me.
I agree but pain and suffering refers to PHYSICAL or EMOTIONAL suffering. Although using MS products may constitut emotional suffering, there is no legal precedent.
Slashdot Mirror
It's also funny how the majority of third world doctors, teachers and yes, terrorists are educated in the US.
I never thought of it that way.....but I agree. Well put.
And when has the UN EVER 'mandated' an invasion? They've been an organization of peace and diplomacy; however they have failed miserably at protecting nations under their union. They tend to fare towards setting up a committee that requires years of investigation rather than deal with the immediate military threat to a nation's sovereignty. Even then, the committee itself is usually a farce because the members are not exactly 'neutral' in nature. They bind themselves to rules of conduct which dictators like Saddam Hussein don't live by then curse the US for acting; meanwhile tens of thousands Iraqis die while Blixie takes 9 months to write an unsubstantiated report that they 'may have' WMD; wait, maybe not....we're still not sure. Either way, the US is condemned for their actions or lack thereof. It's lose, lose. The US has always been held to a higher standard on the international level with very little accountability for other UN members. They usually sit on the sidelines and either cheer or hiss, but most are protected when they ask for help by the US. Personally, I'd rather see the US just back out of not only the UN, but the international scene altogether. I know it's not feasible, but it would be interesting to see how most of these member nations would fare without US strength in the UN and the military / financial might we can bring to the table. Maybe the next time a dictator like Saddam rolls around we should sit it out and let the other 50+ nations that disagreed with us on Iraq sort it out. That, too, will be unlikely because a member nation will come to the Whitehouse crying about being invaded and our prez will cave in. Too bad we probably will not collect on the war debt, either; we seldom do. So, you can cry illegal all you want. You can protest all you want. You can boycott all you want. Just remember your words and actions the next time the US needs to help a country that truly needs it; and what would happen if that help was not available.
I love these debates. Would you still pay $20 for a cd knowing the artist got 50%? Do you even care how much the artist(s) make? $20 spent is $20 gone; regardless of the recipient.
I KNEW there had to be someone out there who would equate this article to a Linux bid; good job!!!!!
Classically trained; yeah right. Try taking a poll of how many indie artists heard Mozart's 5th......taking for granted they even HEARD of Mozart.
MAN is phrase that getting overused; and annoying.
Maybe that's part of the reason why Windows users don't switch. They are referred to as fucking newbs. How would you like to be the outsider looking in; truly interested in a better system and be called names and insulted? Just a thought.
So now we're going to define who has the 'privelage' of using a PC? Who's going to determine that; the government or you?
I thought all Linux geeks work for free
Blech.....The National Enquirer is the MAJOR reporter of any important news. Sheesh.
I agree...it must be nice to be smug to a multi-billion dollar corporation. I wish I could be so smug.
And by your own words and inaction you prove the world is right. That in itself is worthy of criticism.
I would tend to agree but being an engineer you should learn VERY slowly the quickest way between two points is NOT always a straight line; especially in the IT world. Engineers pretty much depend on the functions of IT personnel to the extent of installing their software correctly and keeping the data safe because they have no choice. Given the opportunity, Engineers would be more secure about their own data than trusting it to an outside source. IT can ride whatever wave they want.....but it's the good old floppy or CD that TRULY keeps the data secure.
I'm not especially a MS fan but if companies were not out to make a buck none of us would have jobs. I'm not talking CEO status here (although that has a great impact in the bigger picture), however how long do you think a company losing money can support its staff? As a quality manager, I get into this debate on a regular basis with our sales staff and business unit manager because of profit margins. Apparently they'd rather tape a nickel to each part we sell rather than lose an account. That's completely ludicrous. That means each time we fulfill an order we lose money; and also pisses off the employees because they have not had a raise in 2 years. Jeez, I wonder why. Sure, it's up to us as a business to MAKE ourselves profitable but there inevitably comes a time where we have to tell the customer: "We can't sell you this product anymore because we're losing money'. It's a hard pill to swallow, but I'd rather be part of a 1 million dollar profitable company than a 1 billion dollar company that's losing money left and right; regardless of the corporation name. All this talk on Slashdot about 'free' (music, software, videos, etc) does not create jobs. One could argue IT positions (which is a very small percentage of most viable business models) but what if there's no company to work for? Then what? We'll all be able to enjoy reading Slashdot from a sidewalk by stealing someone else's bandwidth via a Wi-Fi on Main Street. I don't claim to have all the answers but I certainly know how to ask the right questions.
There is a difference between 'willing' and 'harassed'. If I were to get an abortion, I would not be 'willing' to be 'harassed' by the protestors outside the clinic. Same concept here; I may want the service but not the hassles of the self-righteous persons yelling at me to comply with their religious beliefs. Just MHO.
California has been a joke for quite some time now. I still can't believe they have one of the most electoral votes states in the union when they offer 'semi' voting privelages to non-registered voters in the form of bills giving health compensation to non-residents who have children born in the US. Try to explain THAT one to someone who lives in Wisconsin and has raised a family with one of the highest tax rates in the country and can't afford health insurance. Like you said; it's a joke.
1. Penises....go to Venice Beach; you'll disagree. 2. Credit ratings....check out the state budget. 3. Mortgages....where else can I get beachfront property for $1m a square foot? Sounds like a deal.
If you recall, Vader is the one who actually kills the Emperor....hence bringing balance.
NOOOOOO......don't give MS any ideas!!!
I read the link and nowhere does it say that 'file sharing' is illegal; it all refers to copyright...same as here in the US. If I write a paper and distribute it on Kaaza I'm still 'file sharing' but I have not broken any laws.
Wow...Canadian politicians can't be bought? That's a first in diplomacy. I'm moving to Canada!
Now THAT is funny; better soldiers....lol!
"Blinded by the truth" and "flag waving". Huh, the last time I saw a Canadian flag waving in the breeze (in person OR on the news) was in front of the UN. I personally don't have anything against Canadians but when I hear rhetoric like yours it pisses me off. If you feel like the UN will solve all the world's problems then by all means sign on to the fallacy that a bunch of committee ridden diplomats can sit in a chair 3000 miles away from any given conflict and even BEGIN to understand the issues of a military state. When party countries ask for military assistance the UN forms a "committee" to investigate for 2 years before coming to the conclusion that it's "sovereignty" issue. By that time, the assistance isn't needed or wanted because someone like Hitler has already taken power and thousands if not millions of people have died. The UN is like the American Union....they've outlasted their usefulness. They serve no real purpose outside of having a representative. Even then, is that important? There are veto powers in the UN which the US and Great Britain chose to ignore with other dissenting opinions; did that stop us? What REAL power does the UN hold? It only holds the power of the most militaristic entity in its union which is in fact, the US. If that, indeed, is world opinion, then I say pull American forces EVERYWHERE; Europe, Asia, Africa......let's see how the world fares WITHOUT our assistance, or money for that matter. The tune seems to change diplomatically when the US threatens to pull financing for food, guns or social programs for some third world (or not so third world) countries. I, personally am sick and tired of the US being labeled the 'bad guy' in all matters of state. Let Canada fend for themselves on the world map and we'll just protect our borders. Seems like an even trade to me.
I agree but pain and suffering refers to PHYSICAL or EMOTIONAL suffering. Although using MS products may constitut emotional suffering, there is no legal precedent.