I don't know about you but I've been on the usenet since the early 1990s. If I've learnt anything it is this:
Seeing something posted on the usenet is not proof of anything - in fact, it's safe to assume that the poster is full of crap until corroborating, hard-to-fake evidence is presented.
Yes. The same rules apply to all removable digital media (I'm not too sure about DAT/DLT, though).
If you can prove that you have a legitimate use for the discs (ie. you promise not to copy copyrighted audio/video on them) you can get an exemption from the tax.
From what I have heard, it is next impossible for a private person to get exempt. You have to be a company or institution for that.
So, are you Larry Page, or Sergey Brin? I didn't think so. Now fuck off.
So, you don't think that people who believe in the ideal of free (not just open; there's a critical difference!) source and resent SCO's grotesque attack on our most cherised values should not take any action in the face of this aggression?
Well, we've seen appeasers like you before when the future of the human kind has been on the stake. We'll survive you too.
I cannot honestly believe that God would create something like SCO
Not to start a flamewar, but have you ever taken a look at the pile of shit we also call world that the omnipotent God, at least according to your scriptures, created? Compared to the world, SCO's peanuts.
That actually reminds me of a good point my MD friend made a while ago.
He's was involved in an MRI R&D project and was frustrated by the techies/engineers/scientists who insisted on using obscure slang without bothering to translate it. You know, the classical RTFM attitude of an elitist geek.
Over here they teach the MDs to deal with young and old people, people with low/high IQ, people with good/bad literacy and so on. In short, they teach social skills. In my mind, this should be made compulsory in the engineering/science degrees as well.
As I say to my students: if you can't communicate an idea in quantum mechanics to your grandma, you have not really understood the physics.
Why would you want to pay through nose for a proprietary, no-support, closed source *nix when you can have a modern, high-performance version for free?
To me science tells about how nature works. Natural science limits itself to questions which can be falsified, ie. proven wrong. Beyond those, my personal beliefs are not limited to or by the natural science.
For instance, those three points are not falsifiable by the natural science and are therefore out of science's jurisdiction. Therefore I cannot "know" them and that's why in my original post I used to the word "believe".
But yes, I also believe that religions are inherently dangerous, should not have any place in the infrastructure (government, military, schools,...) of a modern society and should be weeded out by time.
How does the realization that love is a result of a biochemical reaction makes it any less real of an emotion?
This is what most people do not get. The fact that you can eventually explain a human experience in the terms of natural science does not devaluate the experience itself.
Are you trying to say that the ability to import and export documents in different formats is irrelevant and everybody should just use OO instead? "Just forget all those five-year old documents. Who needs to see them anymore"? Your clients/collaborators are using Word and the OO export doesn't work? "It's not OOs fault - it's theirs for not using OO instead of the closed but de facto standard word processor. Refuse to collaborate with them until they 'get it'."
What dreamland are you living in?
Functionality is useless if you can't view your old files.
If you believe in a supreme being you are stupid and I am a genious.
Well, that's pretty much it, except I would use the word "rational" instead of (sic) "genious".
science can answer all problems to include the meaning of life
Wrong. I'm a scientist and science tells me only about the nature - nothing more, nothing less.
I choose to believe that there is no meaning of life, there is no fundamental right or wrong, love is only a biochemical reaction in the brain and that consciousness does not survive beyond death. Nothing I see or hear tells me anything else, so it would be irrational to think otherwise.
Religion makes people irrational, its the nature of religion.
Now that you mention it, it's quite absurd that we have a war on drugs for exactly the same reasons.
"Drugs make certain people irrational and prone to violence and crime. People have been using drugs throughout the history." Now, replace the word drug with religion and it still holds true. If so, why the hell can't we crack down on religion just as we deal with drugs?
Well, one thing that completely stopped OO adaptation in our lab was that the math symbols always came out garbled when importing or exporting Word files.
My problem with that show was that it was so single-mindedly concentrated on military conflict.
After a while it just gets boring - just like Star Trek's happy-go-lucky future.
Babylon 5 got the balance between grit and future utopia just about right. At least until the 5th season which was just outright cheesy with the ridiculous FOX-mandated buxom commander.
Slashdot Mirror
And why should the car companies choose unproven companies like Red Hat, Suse, Debian or Slackware over Microsoft?
I don't know about you but I've been on the usenet since the early 1990s. If I've learnt anything it is this:
Seeing something posted on the usenet is not proof of anything - in fact, it's safe to assume that the poster is full of crap until corroborating, hard-to-fake evidence is presented.
So having a legitimate company support you over an obscure horde of sweaty hackers who just tells you to RTFM does not count as a reason?
So where's the real evidence - not just hearsay?
If you can prove that you have a legitimate use for the discs (ie. you promise not to copy copyrighted audio/video on them) you can get an exemption from the tax.
From what I have heard, it is next impossible for a private person to get exempt. You have to be a company or institution for that.
I don't think so.
These days if you don't look greedy, you project an image of someone who's either an idiot or not serious about the case. In either case, you'll lose.
Is there going to be a thanksgiving goatse-turkey this time?
Here's one reference: Andrew Chaikin, A Man on the Moon", Penguin Books, 1998 (ISBN 0-14-024146-9).
The scientific explanation is simple: gremlins.
Or alternatively a chain gang inmates to pick up the trash in orbit...
"Humans and aliens wrapped in two million, five hundred thousand tons of spinning metal, all alone in the night. It can be a dangerous place..."
So, you don't think that people who believe in the ideal of free (not just open; there's a critical difference!) source and resent SCO's grotesque attack on our most cherised values should not take any action in the face of this aggression?
Well, we've seen appeasers like you before when the future of the human kind has been on the stake. We'll survive you too.
Now that just makes feel so much more confident about his work...
Not to start a flamewar, but have you ever taken a look at the pile of shit we also call world that the omnipotent God, at least according to your scriptures, created? Compared to the world, SCO's peanuts.
SCO: Bring it on.
He's was involved in an MRI R&D project and was frustrated by the techies/engineers/scientists who insisted on using obscure slang without bothering to translate it. You know, the classical RTFM attitude of an elitist geek.
Over here they teach the MDs to deal with young and old people, people with low/high IQ, people with good/bad literacy and so on. In short, they teach social skills. In my mind, this should be made compulsory in the engineering/science degrees as well.
As I say to my students: if you can't communicate an idea in quantum mechanics to your grandma, you have not really understood the physics.
Why would you want to pay through nose for a proprietary, no-support, closed source *nix when you can have a modern, high-performance version for free?
To me science tells about how nature works. Natural science limits itself to questions which can be falsified, ie. proven wrong. Beyond those, my personal beliefs are not limited to or by the natural science.
For instance, those three points are not falsifiable by the natural science and are therefore out of science's jurisdiction. Therefore I cannot "know" them and that's why in my original post I used to the word "believe".
But yes, I also believe that religions are inherently dangerous, should not have any place in the infrastructure (government, military, schools,...) of a modern society and should be weeded out by time.
This is what most people do not get. The fact that you can eventually explain a human experience in the terms of natural science does not devaluate the experience itself.
What dreamland are you living in?
Functionality is useless if you can't view your old files.
Well, that's pretty much it, except I would use the word "rational" instead of (sic) "genious".
science can answer all problems to include the meaning of life
Wrong. I'm a scientist and science tells me only about the nature - nothing more, nothing less.
I choose to believe that there is no meaning of life, there is no fundamental right or wrong, love is only a biochemical reaction in the brain and that consciousness does not survive beyond death. Nothing I see or hear tells me anything else, so it would be irrational to think otherwise.
It doesn't matter if OO has more functionality if we cannot import our old Word documents.
Now that you mention it, it's quite absurd that we have a war on drugs for exactly the same reasons.
"Drugs make certain people irrational and prone to violence and crime. People have been using drugs throughout the history." Now, replace the word drug with religion and it still holds true. If so, why the hell can't we crack down on religion just as we deal with drugs?
Well, one thing that completely stopped OO adaptation in our lab was that the math symbols always came out garbled when importing or exporting Word files.
After a while it just gets boring - just like Star Trek's happy-go-lucky future.
Babylon 5 got the balance between grit and future utopia just about right. At least until the 5th season which was just outright cheesy with the ridiculous FOX-mandated buxom commander.