He could have played a clip from that cow Oprah's show where some lady explained, in detail, what "tossing one's salad" was. If they fined Stern for airing the clip, wouldn't they also have to fine Oprah for it originating on her show?
Too bad the GM was a puss. That could have ended that nonsense altogether.
"Also, SCO has A HREF="http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/03/04/HN cascolicensee_1.html">announced a few new licensees including Computer Associates."
I can't believe I just took a shit in my pants at work. What the fuck? I cant stand up and take it to the restroom, because I am wading in a puddle of feces at this very moment. Any change in my seating position will send my poo spilling down my legs and into my socks and shoes. There is no way I can play this off as a fart. It doesn't help at all that I've been spun out for 3 days. I can hardly see straight! How am I possibly going to explain this to my Supervisor when she comes over here to ask me what the fuck I just did in the presence of my employer? She'll make me drop trau in front of everyone again. There it is. The person in the cubicle to the right of me just asked if I could smell "that". I gotta go.
"Sure, it may be 'Stuff that matters', but there's a lot of other non-tech stuff that matters that doesn't make it onto Slashdot because it's not news for nerds. What makes this (decidedly anti-Ashcroft) story special?"
Is Slashdot shifting its focus from computer gadgets and networks and Linux to nothing more than a political commentary board? How is this story 'News for Nerds'?
Sure, it may be 'Stuff that matters', but there's a lot of other non-tech stuff that matters that doesn't make it onto Slashdot because it's not news for nerds. What makes this (decidedly anti-Ashcroft) story special? What does this have to do with "nerd stuff"?
This particular story reeks of an editor foisting a political viewpoint on an audience guaranteed to work themselves into a frothy lather over it (isn't that called trolling?). It belongs on a Political site, not Slashdot.
Oh and yes, I did reply to this thread so that it would actually be read. The parent troll was modded down appropriately. Thanks for reading this.
"Shutting down freenet or any other p2p network could be seen as unconstitutionally removing a forum of free speech."
Not by any reasonable count (although the 9th Circuit seems to be getting itself quite a reputation of late).
I have yet to hear a good argument equating files or collections of files to FREE SPEECH. Contrary to the accusations by people quick to judge and distort my arguments, I'm all about free speech!
P2P and Freenet do not facilitate communication between users like a blog or a chat room or e-mail does. They only facilitate the transfer of files. People who argue that this file transfer equates to speech, IMHO, are stretching their argument very thin. Prove me wrong.
PS: I troll sometimes, but this issue of including filesharing (especially commercial software and copyrighted music) into our First Amendment right really burns me up. Every time I hear it, it just sounds like the person is trying to justify/legitimize behavior they know is wrong.
"Encouraging people to break the law is free speech."
Not in some states.
"As is, by the way, transmitting Microsoft's source code."
Now ya see, that's called reaching. If your stance doesn't quite pass your ethical litmus test, you simply call it "free speech" and continue on living guilt free.
"I was just commenting on your weak will that causes you to determine your morality according to what other people tell you it should be."
You certainly have made a lot of assumptions about my beliefs and character from a single post stating the simple fact that encouraging people to break the law is a crime in itself.
Advocating crime usually isn't a good way to shed an anarchist reputation, or to get people (you know, the ones who write these laws) to start taking you seriously.
"The point of Freenet is to allow that someone to post it, free of persecution."
So you're saying that Freenet's primary use is to circumvent copyright laws in countries that DO have them. And you wonder why music and software intustries are lobbying to get P2P networks like Freenet (don't know if they've been specifically mentioned) shut down?
"It's rather unfortunate that people like yourself base your morals on what papa gub'ment tells you they should be."
And it's unfortunate that people like yourself try to equate petty crime like copyright infringement to some kind of noble civil rights struggle. Some of you will do anything to justify not wanting to pay for the software you use.
Ahh yes, for all those LEGITIMATE uses for P2P networks, such as distributing MP3's and leaked source code, right?
And Slashdotters STILL don't understand why so many people and companies perceive that most traffic on P2P networks involves either porn, infringed music/movies/software.
Suggestions like in the parent post do no favors for establishing legitimacy for P2P netowrks.
"I'm am member of the union of concerned scientists."
Very good, but are you in fact a scientist? With a Ph.D.? From what university?
The reason I'm asking is that many 'independent' groups such as "Physicians for Social Responsibility" have assumed names that suggest that (in this case) the group consists of a bunch of doctors with concerns about the Iraq war.
In fact, none of PSR's staff are actually physicians, and a $50 donation is all that is required to join the group and play doctor.
If you are in fact areal scientist, I mean no disrespect. I just want to be sure you're the real deal.
Lines like "But the casual equation between "open source" and "zero revenue" suggests that on another level you don't really know what you're talking about." IMHO aren't deserving or a response.
If ESR wants to engage corporate executives in serious, productive dialogue, I suggest that he stop insulting the people he is trying to win over to his cause.
"Any action from Microsoft to block Lin---s will show their true intentions are not to protect their trademark, but to eliminate competition and maintain their monopoly."
So should we assume then that Michael Robertson's true intentions are not to develop an open operating system that appeals to a wide range of users, but to antagonize Bill Gates?
The latter sounds more and more probable every time Slashdot posts a story about this clown.
Don't blame Microsoft for this childishness...
on
Lindows becomes Lindash
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
Lindows, or whatever you feel like calling it now, set itself up to be screwed with by Microsoft. It didn't do them any favors to present themselves as an imitation of another well-known product, and it doesn't improve their reputation in th epublic's eyes to respond to the inevitable lawsuit with juvenile antics. Is it any wonder why so many people see Linux as little more than a script-kiddie OS?
Is THIS what you want your boss to think of when you're pitching Linux for the office? Do Linux and OSS a favor: stop supporting Lindows.
Ahh yes, universal broadband, complete with government beaurocracy, paid for by taxpayers, funneled directly to the wallets of media industry campaign contributors' wallets.
Slashdot Mirror
So you're comparing the purchasing of music to a tax?
I don't know about you, but nobody is threatening to imprison me for not buying music!!
Yes, because we know human beings are infallible.
Too bad the GM was a puss. That could have ended that nonsense altogether.
RTFA - this IS about paper and pen ballots, and a machine's inability to properly record it. This has NOTHING to do with people voting on computers.
Are they even trying anymore?
I can't believe I just took a shit in my pants at work. What the fuck? I cant stand up and take it to the restroom, because I am wading in a puddle of feces at this very moment. Any change in my seating position will send my poo spilling down my legs and into my socks and shoes. There is no way I can play this off as a fart. It doesn't help at all that I've been spun out for 3 days. I can hardly see straight! How am I possibly going to explain this to my Supervisor when she comes over here to ask me what the fuck I just did in the presence of my employer? She'll make me drop trau in front of everyone again. There it is. The person in the cubicle to the right of me just asked if I could smell "that". I gotta go.
Show me where the ONLINE part of "your rights online" is in this story.
"Sure, it may be 'Stuff that matters', but there's a lot of other non-tech stuff that matters that doesn't make it onto Slashdot because it's not news for nerds. What makes this (decidedly anti-Ashcroft) story special?"
Is Slashdot shifting its focus from computer gadgets and networks and Linux to nothing more than a political commentary board? How is this story 'News for Nerds'?
Sure, it may be 'Stuff that matters', but there's a lot of other non-tech stuff that matters that doesn't make it onto Slashdot because it's not news for nerds. What makes this (decidedly anti-Ashcroft) story special? What does this have to do with "nerd stuff"?
This particular story reeks of an editor foisting a political viewpoint on an audience guaranteed to work themselves into a frothy lather over it (isn't that called trolling?). It belongs on a Political site, not Slashdot.
Oh and yes, I did reply to this thread so that it would actually be read. The parent troll was modded down appropriately. Thanks for reading this.
Not by any reasonable count (although the 9th Circuit seems to be getting itself quite a reputation of late).
I have yet to hear a good argument equating files or collections of files to FREE SPEECH. Contrary to the accusations by people quick to judge and distort my arguments, I'm all about free speech!
P2P and Freenet do not facilitate communication between users like a blog or a chat room or e-mail does. They only facilitate the transfer of files. People who argue that this file transfer equates to speech, IMHO, are stretching their argument very thin. Prove me wrong.
PS: I troll sometimes, but this issue of including filesharing (especially commercial software and copyrighted music) into our First Amendment right really burns me up. Every time I hear it, it just sounds like the person is trying to justify/legitimize behavior they know is wrong.
Not in some states.
"As is, by the way, transmitting Microsoft's source code."
Now ya see, that's called reaching. If your stance doesn't quite pass your ethical litmus test, you simply call it "free speech" and continue on living guilt free.
Leave it to RMS and Slashdotters who parrot him to equate copyright infringement with the civil rights movement.
You certainly have made a lot of assumptions about my beliefs and character from a single post stating the simple fact that encouraging people to break the law is a crime in itself.
Advocating crime usually isn't a good way to shed an anarchist reputation, or to get people (you know, the ones who write these laws) to start taking you seriously.
"The point of Freenet is to allow that someone to post it, free of persecution."
So you're saying that Freenet's primary use is to circumvent copyright laws in countries that DO have them. And you wonder why music and software intustries are lobbying to get P2P networks like Freenet (don't know if they've been specifically mentioned) shut down?
I cordially invite you to come down of your moral high-horse; I'd like to introduce you to my friend Common Sense.
Most people don't download music and commercial software to push for change in the industry; they do it to get shit without having to pay for it.
And it's unfortunate that people like yourself try to equate petty crime like copyright infringement to some kind of noble civil rights struggle. Some of you will do anything to justify not wanting to pay for the software you use.
And Slashdotters STILL don't understand why so many people and companies perceive that most traffic on P2P networks involves either porn, infringed music/movies/software.
Suggestions like in the parent post do no favors for establishing legitimacy for P2P netowrks.
"seems like a natural, uh, application, for the freenet project ;)"i>
Nothing like being moderated up for encouraging people to break the law.
Very good, but are you in fact a scientist? With a Ph.D.? From what university?
The reason I'm asking is that many 'independent' groups such as "Physicians for Social Responsibility" have assumed names that suggest that (in this case) the group consists of a bunch of doctors with concerns about the Iraq war.
In fact, none of PSR's staff are actually physicians, and a $50 donation is all that is required to join the group and play doctor.
If you are in fact areal scientist, I mean no disrespect. I just want to be sure you're the real deal.
If ESR wants to engage corporate executives in serious, productive dialogue, I suggest that he stop insulting the people he is trying to win over to his cause.
So should we assume then that Michael Robertson's true intentions are not to develop an open operating system that appeals to a wide range of users, but to antagonize Bill Gates?
The latter sounds more and more probable every time Slashdot posts a story about this clown.
Is THIS what you want your boss to think of when you're pitching Linux for the office? Do Linux and OSS a favor: stop supporting Lindows.
Where do I sign up??
It's especially appropriate for Tom's reviews.
In case you haven't noticed, Cingular isn't the only wireless phone service provider out there.