Real are bitching that apple is using the DMCA to stop them hacking the ipod to play their crappie DRM ridden format when if any one tried to mess with their DRM the DMCA is the very first thing they'd turn to stop them. I mean if Real managed to win some sort of court case against apple wouldn't that just set a precedent which could be used against them at a later date?
"The geneva convetion example, let see I can a: Get my head brutally sawed off my body or b: suffer some "humiliation", again I think I'll take b..The geneva convention is followed by which group/regime/countries? Oh thats right, none. A bunch of lip service by those looking to appease the PC crowd."
So I take it then that you think it's ok to torture people? Fair enough but if you don't think its ok to torture people then no matter how many times you say "every one else does it" it doesn't make you any less of a hypocrite for insinuating that you think its all fine and dandy when "our boys" do it but not ok when the "bad guys" do it. Even if you do agree with the principal of torturing prisoners the "everyone does it" excuse is still invalid. That excuse could be applied to everything, I mean lets go back in time and tell the US founding fathers why even have a democracy, I mean most people don't have one so why bother? Why bother having morals or principals if no one else does, lets let the lowest common denominator decide how we live. Its a lame excuse and it shouldn't cut it with anyone with any sort of principals.
In theory sony should be doing very well but in practice its not because it is pissing of its customers with annoying anti features that they don't want and even non technical people are waking up to this fact.
Sony is doing well with its console business at the moment and due to its sheer size it should continue to do well but I honestly don't think its going to go any where with its multimedia strategy the way it is now. Sonys only consolation is that Microsoft's multimedia + console offerings will probably be just as restrictive and just as bad as its own. This is what will stop consoles becoming multimedia hubs where people buy everything from sony/microsoft. In my opinion either very few people will use sony/microsofts services or third party developers will make software which will allow users to rip/play cds in non encumbered formats.
Given Sony's history of writing bad API's for its procs (ps2, ps1) I would not be surprised if history repeats itself and cell is yet another pain in the hole to develop for. Bottom line: I think sonys internal conflicts of interest will screw up cell's potential outside of the console market. Good technology is not the only thing a company needs to succeed in business and ultimately it is games/cool features that cell consoles not their technical specifications.
"The government in the US is purportedly made up of The People, so regardless of what the bozos e.g. in DC call themselves, once they have crossed the line from being Representatives of the People - Public Servants, if you will - to being Tyrannical Oppressors of the Citizenry, the Citizens can rightfully claim that the oppressors are not The Government, regardless of any lying blather to the contrary"
Ok but those bozos in the white house still run the country and make decisions on your behalf which affect you. They are the ones that sent your troops into Iraq, they are the ones who tax you, you may not consider them your public representatives but for all intents and purposes they are till you get rid of them one way or another.
"Arguably, the difference in firepower between handguns and rifles against a 21st century military is not so different than the differnce in firepower between e.g. the American settlers and the British oppressors,"
ehhhh what ? I think their is a big difference between a hunting rifle versus a helicopter gun ship and a flint lock rifle versus a bow and arrow or a slightly less accurate flint lock rifle.
"However, I think it is even more important to remember that the deadliest weapons are ideas. As such, the Constitution itself is a virtual arsenal, and the 2nd amendment is just one of the bullets (or cruise missiles, as the case may be) it gives the People to use."
"Revolution doesn't have to be civil war, however. And short of a Revolution, I doubt this society will survive long enough to be reformed..."
Things need to get a lot worse before they get better. People in the west are apathetic right now because from day to day they are comfortable and secure (relative to the rest of the world). This is not going to last forever and when the bubble bursts and people start to feel the wind of fortune change then they will be more susceptible to new ideas for better or worse.
Ok lets suppose the revolution does come and you are successful what are you going to replace the current system with? Do you think your new system (or variation on the old one) will be any less susceptible to the forces of corruption and greed than the last one ? A country is ultimately forged by the will of its people not theories and pieces of paper. The problem with Democracy today is that the majority of people are apathetic about it and those who are not seek to exploit it.
"Unfortunately, "working to Prevent corruption and greed from screwing things up" is an endless, demoralizing task"
Thats true but then again for the majority of people so is the day to day struggle of staying alive and sane. An armed revolution will ultimately land your children with the same problems you face today namely facing greed and corruption and who is to say that your children will be any less apathetic than the majority are today. Saying this I am presuming that the government you propose be established after the revolution would be some kind of democracy and hence ultimately susceptible to the same problems we face today. So in other words unless you propose that we completely change the current system of government in the US (i.e not democracy) and that this new system you propose would some how be immune to corruption then we shall ultimately be faced with the same problems. In other words armed revolution is just putting off solving the real problems we face today.
I pretty much agree with everything you say but the point that I was trying to make is that the weapons you are legally allowed to own right now are not going to be of much use to you against the government when push comes to shove.
"If it ever comes down to war against our own government, the same political rules will apply. Voters won't stomach bloodshed like we endured at Gettysburg."
I wish I could agree with you but I look at fox news and the way the media operates in America and I cant help but doubt. The government does seem to have a undue amount of control over people in the US and is an expert at manipulating facts and putting its own spin on things, remember the line between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" is a thin one and depends completely on who you talk to. If they can convince enough people that those that are rising up are terrorists then any insurrection is doomed to failure.
"your point about muslims living within israel proper (i.e. not wb or gaza) -- you might be surprised, many of them serve in the military as volunteers (arab israelis are exempt from conscription AFAIK)"
Fair point but are all of them happy with the Israeli Palestinian situation ? Do many of them have relatives in Palestine and has their been any cases of attacks on Israel from within ? How does the Israeli security forces deal with such acts do they knock down any houses within Israel ? I am not being anti Israeli or anything I am just curious.
"More food for thought. My biases are showing, I know, but I am more eager to get people realizing that civil war isn't going to solve anything and that our only hope as a society is to stop the corruption and greed before it drives us to the brink."
You hit the nail on the head. A gun you can legally own in the US is fine and dandy for defending yourself against common criminals and having a bit of fun (shooting ranges etc) but when it comes to fighting a modern army in a modern country forget it. The revolution will be televised and the government will be calling you a terrorist and the second amendment will mean nothing. Actively working to Prevent corruption and greed from screwing things up for society today is far more productive than fantasizing about taking on the federal government in firefight you wont win tomorrow.
"They also didn't forsee Radio, TV, or the Internet. Does the First Amandment not apply to those? "
So what exactly does that prove ? Improving everybody's ability to understand and express an idea via new mediums does not pose a threat to the general populous. Allowing individuals/organizations to own nukes and chemical weapons however could well pose a threat to the general population and their may well be a case for limiting a persons right to bare arms in such extreme cases. The first amendment and the second amendment are two separate issues.
"You are forgetting that the "army" is composed of... American people! Would a soldier "have the stomach for" shooting his neighbor? His wife? His son or daughter?"
Well I am sure the nazi's sent plenty of jews who were their neighbors to the camps under the right conditions I am sure it could happen again in a modern western country.
"You're arguing that American civilians simply aren't equipped to violently overthrow an oppressive government."
The real question is would the majority of American people today have the stomach for the type of fight it takes to stand up to a modern army ?
"no one in power would be safe and no great percentage of the country could be successfully occupied by hostile forces."
So how come the American civil war is not continuing today down south? Remeber that was back when war was a simpler matter and private individuals owning weapons could make much more of a practical difference.
"Armed revolt is the reason the 2nd amendment exists."
The world is a very different place now than it was when that document was written. The US founding fathers could not have foreseen helicopters, nukes, chemical weapons etc etc. This post is not an anti gun post, my point is that its getting easier and easier for modern governments to control a large populous with an ever shrinking number of well equipped hired goons. Again I reiterate the fact that I am not against the second amendment I just think it is highly overrated as a device to protect personal freedom in modern countries.
". Palestine is not part if israel as of right now. So, we're talking about people from OUTSIDE the country coming in to do damage. It's easier to protect yourself from people coming in than it is to protect yourself from people already inside. Plus this isn't a revolt against the government. It's a few Jew-hating terrorists who want to dismantle and kill everyone inside of Israel."
Yes but doesn't Israel have a large muslim minority 14% or 759,079 living within its borders ? Not saying muslim = hamas member but all the same they can't be to sympathetic to whats happening "next door". Also isn't Israel occupying parts of palestine and hence have its troops deployed deployed in areas with a hostile populous?
" You are making an assumption that the government MUST have better weapons than the people. Fine. "
Ok name one country (apart from switzerland) where the general population has better or comparative weapons to the government ? Do you really think its a good idea to give private groups/individuals the right to potentially own any weapon a government has ? Would you be happy with some loony cult having the ability to own a ballistic missile and a few chemical warheads ? I didn't mean to come across to melodramatic with the last example but for a popular uprising to have any sort of a chance the population would want to have access to RPG's/Stinger missiles and fully automatic weapons at the very least to stand a chance against a modern army. My question is where do you draw the line on what a private individual should/should not own ? How literally would you interpret the second amendment
"So, the whole purpose of the second amendment is so that there will never again be a tyrannical government in the US as Britain was a few hundred years ago."
The world is a very different place now than it was when that document was written. The US founding fathers could not have foreseen helicopters, nukes, chemical weapons etc etc. This post is not an anti gun post, my point is that its getting easier and easier for modern governments to control a large populous with an ever shrinking number of well equipped hired goons. I am not against the second amendment I just think it is highly overrated as a device to protect personal freedom in modern countries.
"The second option is a full-on armed revolt, like we've seen through-out history, and is not feasible without privately owned weaponry."
Ok I Don't have a problem with people owning guns for their own protection/fun but I think the whole armed revolt against the government idea with privately owned weapons is a load of crap in modern countries. I mean what good is your colt against a f16 or a fancy chopper with bullets that go through walls and sensors that can see you through walls? Look at the situation in Palestine and look at Iraq. Matters of opinion aside in both countries large amounts of the population have AK47's, m16's and RPG's (stuff that a private weapons owner can not have in the US ), they have suicide bombers and plastic explosives. The opposition (Iraqi militants, hamas etc) manage to kill a few isreali/US soldiers but most of the time they get pasted . Compare the amount of Israelis killed to the number of Palestinians, compare the amount of Iraqi militants killed to the amount of Us/Foreign forces. Now leave Iraq/Palestine and imagine trying to conduct an armed uprising in America, a built up country with a huge police force, army etc ? Do you really think that its going to be johnny come lately and his pea shooter thats going to bring down the government or would you say that it is more likely to be some rogue element of the army that decides enough is enough?
" IBM's patent department is actively lobbying Europe to legalise software patents. They have invested millions in fighting example cases to leading European lawcourts such as the EPO's Technical Boards of Appeal and the German Federal Court in order to soften and eventually remove European restrictions on patenting software. They have also threatened European politicians that IBM might close down local facilities if software patents are not legalised in Europe. IBM has also prevented the US government from conducting studies on the value of software patents for the national economy. In the wake of the Opensource hype, IBM's rhetoric has become relatively moderate, but nonetheless it is supported by real pressure. IBM has acquired approximately 1000 European software patents whose legal status is currently unclear. Given the great number of software patents in IBM's hands, IBM is one of the few software companies who may have a genuine interest in software patentability. Once software patents become assertable in Europe, an IBM tax of several billion EUR per year may be levied on European software companies."
For further reading go here : http://swpat.ffii.org/players/ibm/index.en.html
Don't forget that software patents are a big issue for software developers that use the BSD licence as well and that the BSD community has seen its fair share of litigation. This isnt just a Linux/GPL issue.
Same could be said about Theo de raadt, people on/. don't seem to like developers who stand up for what they believe in and don't compromise on what they believe in. I appreciate both Richard stallman and theo de raadt they both make software which has improved my life and they are not willing to compromise their views to make a quick buck and I respect that a lot.
Just looked at the pictures. Interesting design and all but it really looks like an out of place novelty building who's look won't be replicated again in a hurry. I don't think comparisons with the Sydney Opera House is fair as the sydney opera house fits in with its surroundings and enhances them. Ah well...
"Hey dawgs! A major shout out to ZJ Boarding House where owner Mikke (with two k's!) and manager Matt hooked us Spotmates up with some 411 on buying the "right" surf boards. (See my video!) Yep, I've decided to take up surfing, and heard word on the street that ZJ Boarding House was the place to go!! They were awesome. I love it here on Main Street!
Yo, Matt - man, thank you so much for the help. Reed and I are gonna seriously take you up on lessons, dude. And PS: we wanna hear some of your tunes!
Lates,
Kai"
Do people on/. really want to read crap like this ? Concept aside does this story and the way that it is done appeal to anyone here at all. The shit that these people come out with is so contrived and cliched that it bends my mind. The only people (I hope) who could possibly appreciate such stylized phony crap like this are people who do not have the attention span to devote time and energy into reading this site. I mean who the fuck are their target market ? Insecure wannabe socialite teenage girls who are not allowed go out and have a real social life ? Scientologists who watch will and grace ? I mean where do they expect this to go ? I think this sort of thing could work if it were based around some sort of subculture and not a bunch of paper mache stereotypes.
I know what you mean this thing looks amazing but can one really justify paying so much for so little capacity ? I think the looks, the ogg support, the radio, the microphone and the form factor could swing it for some people (they nearly got me) but the price of this thing and the thought that you could just get an ipod mini for cheaper or an ipod for in and around the same price is sickening. I couldn't buy something like this with a clear consiounce but having said that I am really really tempted. If this was $150 - $180 I would probably cave and buy but I have a feeling its going to be more like $250-$300+.
Their are a lot of artists that don't see anything wrong with DRM in fact they believe that they have some absolute right to control what some one does/does not do with their song once they buy it. They see more control as a good thing, they see people being sued for sharing files on p2p networks as a good thing, they see making reverse engineering illegal as a good thing. These people are not even signed to major labels or making big money they are small time musicians/artists who see the world in terms of "How does this immediately benefit me". Not all small artists are like this but their definitely is a sizable group of them out their. They are like the file sharers they despise, greedy, shortsighted and blind to the consequences of their own actions. They don't seem to understand that if they get signed/employed by some one that they will not own the rights to 'their' work. They seem to have a 'if I made it then its mine mentality' that resides outside of the real world of the content creation industry.
The real problem with DRM as I have always seen it is what it costs us in terms of personal freedom, you can not have privacy on your computer and have an anyway effective DRM system. To be effective any DRM system has to have some third party (probably Microsoft) with the ability to check your files and verify if you own them or not. That third party has to be able to look at whats on your hard drive, it has to ensure that you can only run protected content only under certain circumstances. This puts a lot of power in the hands of that third party couple that with the ability to redefine at will the terms under-which people buy content (that license agreement you click yes to when upgrading to the new version of itunes) and you put a lot of power in the hands of that third party and the content owner.
Now the third party (in this case Microsoft) prioritizes the big content owners, they are the ones that make the rules, the third party merely collects a tariff for those who choose to travel its roads. The big content owners work together for their own interests, they are effectively a cartel and they do not have the little guys interests at heart at all. They control the distribution and the promotion mediums.
DRM is about control and as always the people with the biggest piles of money are the ones in control. You would think that this would be easy to explain to someone working in pizzahut trying to scrounge up enough money to make another release, you would think that they would at least empathize with the fact that in the main stream music business the only person who wins is the record company, not the artist and not the consumer. They always think that they will be different and that they won't be fooled into signing a bad contract.
DRM systems will always be flawed for a number of reasons. 1)Once the rights of a file has been cracked once and it has been moved to an unencumbered format then the cat is out of the bag and its going to be mirrored and download all over the place. 2) If your DRM hardware systems are in place (widely accepted) they are going to be their for quite some time. It takes people a long time to upgrade software/hardware and the rate at which you can get them to do this is limited. No system is perfect and so DRM will always be a race between the crackers and the manufacturers the speed limit on this race is the rate at which people are willing to fork over new cash for new systems that offer a limited upgrade in functionality.
The real problem lies with short sighted content producers who to my mind are just as much of a problem as the person who downloads everything and pays for nothing but can these people really be blamed for being insecure about what they own and wanting to make a buck doing something they love ? These people need to see a solid alternative to the mainstream music industry that offer them a chance to organize performances, tours, promotions and sell their wares all in a way that does not screw the consumer. The internet has t
Fair point concerning IBM and a specific licence but if sun were to release java under an open licence I don't think they would offer it under one that would allow IBM the chance to run away with the ball. IBM may not have said release your source under the GPL but I harldy think they were expecting SUN to release their code under the BSD licence.
"They get the open source developers to help build the application, help people get buy in, then they take the codebase in house and work on it from there making improvements and selling it for mucho dinero."
uuuh doesn't the GPL, which was the licence I believe IBM asked java to be released under, prohibit this ? If they wanted to make changes and keep the changes in house then they could not publicly distribute it ie sell it if java was released under the GPL. This is one of the main strengths of the GPL it stops people forking and running. Linus Torvalds has even commented on this fact:
"I personally think that the BSD license is a dead end for serious projects, since it inevitably results in forking with no way to re-join if it becomes commercially viable.
Forking a project is in my opinion hugely important, since forks are how all real development gets done, and the ability to fork keeps everybody honest (i.e. if you don't do a good job and keep your users happy, they can always fork the project and go on their own). But equally important is the ability to join back forks, when/if some group finds the right solution to a problem. And that's where the GPL comes in: you can really think of the whole license as nothing more than a requirement to be able to re-join a forked project from either side."
Plucker is cool but it has been around for quite a while now and I would describe it as a flagship open source app for palm. My point is its hardly new and most of the developers working on it now have been working on it for a long time, it is not a barromater of new developers taking interest in the palm scene.
Palmopensource.com is cool, I read the forums a lot when I was working on my project but it does kind of underline my point, the forums on palmopensource.com are very quite and most of the releases posted on it are old palm programs being updated for cobalt.
"Getting PalmOS ROMS is pretty easy - it took me two days or so from filling in the developers form to getting my password for full access."
For some unkown reason 4 people from my college were working on palm related projects, we all filled out the forms multiple times. None of us got access to the roms, in the end I had to give them the ones I got from a warez channel (ewww I shouldn't have to that). I couldn't rip mine of my palm vx cause I had a program which messed around with its rom image (cant remember programs name right now).
I like palm pilots but I can't help but feeling that the tide is turning against them with the army of cheap series 60 based phones on the market that provide most of the pda functions that the average user needs. For the power user who wants loads of bopo mulitmedia crap (I don't want this) pocket pc seems to be the way to go. I often wonder where palm will go to find a market, at the moment, with the purchase of treo, they seem to be going for the business phone market. I am not so sure about palms chances there as nokia make some pretty cool high end phones with much better (read simpler) interfaces then anything I have seen palm come up with. Ah well I guess only time will tell.
Recently I ended up doing a college project for my old palm vx(os 4) on my powerbook (it was a wiki). I used prc-tools and I developed it on os x in c. During the course of my project (8 weeks) I noticed a few things:
1) Most mailing lists relating to palm software development seem very very quite these days.
2) Not much new software seems to be emerging for palm compared to a year or two ago and all the open source stuff seems to be people just updating old programs to deal with palms new os's.
3) I thought palms docs (for stuff relating to os 3.5/4 anyway) seemed a bit crap.
4)from prc-tools home page "The current release, prc-tools 2.3, was released on 2003-09-18."
5)Getting access to palm os roms through offical channels was a total pain in the ass (I had to go to a warez channel after my requests were ignored time and time again).
My question is have things gotten any better ? From my own experiences and what I see on freshmeat interest in the palm platform seems to be dwindling. Any one care to comment ?
Slashdot Mirror
Real are bitching that apple is using the DMCA to stop them hacking the ipod to play their crappie DRM ridden format when if any one tried to mess with their DRM the DMCA is the very first thing they'd turn to stop them. I mean if Real managed to win some sort of court case against apple wouldn't that just set a precedent which could be used against them at a later date?
"The geneva convetion example, let see I can a: Get my head brutally sawed off my body or b: suffer some "humiliation", again I think I'll take b..The geneva convention is followed by which group/regime/countries? Oh thats right, none. A bunch of lip service by those looking to appease the PC crowd."
So I take it then that you think it's ok to torture people? Fair enough but if you don't think its ok to torture people then no matter how many times you say "every one else does it" it doesn't make you any less of a hypocrite for insinuating that you think its all fine and dandy when "our boys" do it but not ok when the "bad guys" do it.
Even if you do agree with the principal of torturing prisoners the "everyone does it" excuse is still invalid. That excuse could be applied to everything, I mean lets go back in time and tell the US founding fathers why even have a democracy, I mean most people don't have one so why bother? Why bother having morals or principals if no one else does, lets let the lowest common denominator decide how we live. Its a lame excuse and it shouldn't cut it with anyone with any sort of principals.
The problem with sony at the moment is that it is at war with itself:
r .h tml)
:
3 92 4_0_8_0_C
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.02/sony_p
The hardware that it is putting on the market at the moment is severely affected by this war
http://www.ipodlounge.com/articles_more.php?id=
In theory sony should be doing very well but in practice its not because it is pissing of its customers with annoying anti features that they don't want and even non technical people are waking up to this fact.
Sony is doing well with its console business at the moment and due to its sheer size it should continue to do well but I honestly don't think its going to go any where with its multimedia strategy the way it is now. Sonys only consolation is that Microsoft's multimedia + console offerings will probably be just as restrictive and just as bad as its own. This is what will stop consoles becoming multimedia hubs where people buy everything from sony/microsoft. In my opinion either very few people will use sony/microsofts services or third party developers will make software which will allow users to rip/play cds in non encumbered formats.
Given Sony's history of writing bad API's for its procs (ps2, ps1) I would not be surprised if history repeats itself and cell is yet another pain in the hole to develop for. Bottom line: I think sonys internal conflicts of interest will screw up cell's potential outside of the console market. Good technology is not the only thing a company needs to succeed in business and ultimately it is games/cool features that cell consoles not their technical specifications.
Some figures on HIV/AIDS :
http://www.whitehouse.gov/onap/facts.html
I think they support your point. Anyone care to comment ?
"The government in the US is purportedly made up of The People, so regardless of what the bozos e.g. in DC call themselves, once they have crossed the line from being Representatives of the People - Public Servants, if you will - to being Tyrannical Oppressors of the Citizenry, the Citizens can rightfully claim that the oppressors are not The Government, regardless of any lying blather to the contrary"
Ok but those bozos in the white house still run the country and make decisions on your behalf which affect you. They are the ones that sent your troops into Iraq, they are the ones who tax you, you may not consider them your public representatives but for all intents and purposes they are till you get rid of them one way or another.
"Arguably, the difference in firepower between handguns and rifles against a 21st century military is not so different than the differnce in firepower between e.g. the American settlers and the British oppressors,"
ehhhh what ? I think their is a big difference between a hunting rifle versus a helicopter gun ship and a flint lock rifle versus a bow and arrow or a slightly less accurate flint lock rifle.
"However, I think it is even more important to remember that the deadliest weapons are ideas. As such, the Constitution itself is a virtual arsenal, and the 2nd amendment is just one of the bullets (or cruise missiles, as the case may be) it gives the People to use."
I agree with you 100 percent.
"Revolution doesn't have to be civil war, however. And short of a Revolution, I doubt this society will survive long enough to be reformed ..."
Things need to get a lot worse before they get better. People in the west are apathetic right now because from day to day they are comfortable and secure (relative to the rest of the world). This is not going to last forever and when the bubble bursts and people start to feel the wind of fortune change then they will be more susceptible to new ideas for better or worse.
Ok lets suppose the revolution does come and you are successful what are you going to replace the current system with? Do you think your new system (or variation on the old one) will be any less susceptible to the forces of corruption and greed than the last one ? A country is ultimately forged by the will of its people not theories and pieces of paper. The problem with Democracy today is that the majority of people are apathetic about it and those who are not seek to exploit it.
"Unfortunately, "working to Prevent corruption and greed from screwing things up" is an endless, demoralizing task"
Thats true but then again for the majority of people so is the day to day struggle of staying alive and sane. An armed revolution will ultimately land your children with the same problems you face today namely facing greed and corruption and who is to say that your children will be any less apathetic than the majority are today. Saying this I am presuming that the government you propose be established after the revolution would be some kind of democracy and hence ultimately susceptible to the same problems we face today. So in other words unless you propose that we completely change the current system of government in the US (i.e not democracy) and that this new system you propose would some how be immune to corruption then we shall ultimately be faced with the same problems. In other words armed revolution is just putting off solving the real problems we face today.
I pretty much agree with everything you say but the point that I was trying to make is that the weapons you are legally allowed to own right now are not going to be of much use to you against the government when push comes to shove.
"If it ever comes down to war against our own government, the same political rules will apply. Voters won't stomach bloodshed like we endured at Gettysburg."
I wish I could agree with you but I look at fox news and the way the media operates in America and I cant help but doubt. The government does seem to have a undue amount of control over people in the US and is an expert at manipulating facts and putting its own spin on things, remember the line between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" is a thin one and depends completely on who you talk to. If they can convince enough people that those that are rising up are terrorists then any insurrection is doomed to failure.
"your point about muslims living within israel proper (i.e. not wb or gaza) -- you might be surprised, many of them serve in the military as volunteers (arab israelis are exempt from conscription AFAIK)"
Fair point but are all of them happy with the Israeli Palestinian situation ? Do many of them have relatives in Palestine and has their been any cases of attacks on Israel from within ? How does the Israeli security forces deal with such acts do they knock down any houses within Israel ? I am not being anti Israeli or anything I am just curious.
"More food for thought. My biases are showing, I know, but I am more eager to get people realizing that civil war isn't going to solve anything and that our only hope as a society is to stop the corruption and greed before it drives us to the brink."
You hit the nail on the head. A gun you can legally own in the US is fine and dandy for defending yourself against common criminals and having a bit of fun (shooting ranges etc) but when it comes to fighting a modern army in a modern country forget it. The revolution will be televised and the government will be calling you a terrorist and the second amendment will mean nothing. Actively working to Prevent corruption and greed from screwing things up for society today is far more productive than fantasizing about taking on the federal government in firefight you wont win tomorrow.
"They also didn't forsee Radio, TV, or the Internet. Does the First Amandment not apply to those? "
So what exactly does that prove ? Improving everybody's ability to understand and express an idea via new mediums does not pose a threat to the general populous. Allowing individuals/organizations to own nukes and chemical weapons however could well pose a threat to the general population and their may well be a case for limiting a persons right to bare arms in such extreme cases. The first amendment and the second amendment are two separate issues.
"You are forgetting that the "army" is composed of... American people! Would a soldier "have the stomach for" shooting his neighbor? His wife? His son or daughter?"
Well I am sure the nazi's sent plenty of jews who were their neighbors to the camps under the right conditions I am sure it could happen again in a modern western country.
"You're arguing that American civilians simply aren't equipped to violently overthrow an oppressive government."
The real question is would the majority of American people today have the stomach for the type of fight it takes to stand up to a modern army ?
"no one in power would be safe and no great percentage of the country could be successfully occupied by hostile forces."
So how come the American civil war is not continuing today down south? Remeber that was back when war was a simpler matter and private individuals owning weapons could make much more of a practical difference.
"Armed revolt is the reason the 2nd amendment exists."
The world is a very different place now than it was when that document was written. The US founding fathers could not have foreseen helicopters, nukes, chemical weapons etc etc. This post is not an anti gun post, my point is that its getting easier and easier for modern governments to control a large populous with an ever shrinking number of well equipped hired goons. Again I reiterate the fact that I am not against the second amendment I just think it is highly overrated as a device to protect personal freedom in modern countries.
". Palestine is not part if israel as of right now. So, we're talking about people from OUTSIDE the country coming in to do damage. It's easier to protect yourself from people coming in than it is to protect yourself from people already inside. Plus this isn't a revolt against the government. It's a few Jew-hating terrorists who want to dismantle and kill everyone inside of Israel."
Yes but doesn't Israel have a large muslim minority 14% or 759,079 living within its borders ? Not saying muslim = hamas member but all the same they can't be to sympathetic to whats happening "next door". Also isn't Israel occupying
parts of palestine and hence have its troops deployed deployed in areas with a hostile populous?
" You are making an assumption that the government MUST have better weapons than the people. Fine. "
Ok name one country (apart from switzerland) where the general population has better or comparative weapons to the government ? Do you really think its a good idea to give private groups/individuals the right to potentially own any weapon a government has ? Would you be happy with some loony cult having the ability to own a ballistic missile and a few chemical warheads ? I didn't mean to come across to melodramatic with the last example but for a popular uprising to have any sort of a chance the population would want to have access to RPG's/Stinger missiles and fully automatic weapons at the very least to stand a chance against a modern army.
My question is where do you draw the line on what a private individual should/should not own ? How literally would you interpret the second amendment
"So, the whole purpose of the second amendment is so that there will never again be a tyrannical government in the US as Britain was a few hundred years ago."
The world is a very different place now than it was when that document was written. The US founding fathers could not have foreseen helicopters, nukes, chemical weapons etc etc. This post is not an anti gun post, my point is that its getting easier and easier for modern governments to control a large populous with an ever shrinking number of well equipped hired goons. I am not against the second amendment I just think it is highly overrated as a device to protect personal freedom in modern countries.
"The second option is a full-on armed revolt, like we've seen through-out history, and is not feasible without privately owned weaponry."
Ok I Don't have a problem with people owning guns for their own protection/fun but I think the whole armed revolt against the government idea with privately owned weapons is a load of crap in modern countries. I mean what good is your colt against a f16 or a fancy chopper with bullets that go through walls and sensors that can see you through walls? Look at the situation in Palestine and look at Iraq. Matters of opinion aside in both countries large amounts of the population have AK47's, m16's and RPG's (stuff that a private weapons owner can not have in the US ), they have suicide bombers and plastic explosives. The opposition (Iraqi militants, hamas etc) manage to kill a few isreali/US soldiers but most of the time they get pasted . Compare the amount of Israelis killed to the number of Palestinians, compare the amount of Iraqi militants killed to the amount of Us/Foreign forces. Now leave Iraq/Palestine and imagine trying to conduct an armed uprising in America, a built up country with a huge police force, army etc ? Do you really think that its going to be johnny come lately and his pea shooter thats going to bring down the government or would you say that it is more likely to be some rogue element of the army that decides enough is enough?
" IBM's patent department is actively lobbying Europe to legalise software patents. They have invested millions in fighting example cases to leading European lawcourts such as the EPO's Technical Boards of Appeal and the German Federal Court in order to soften and eventually remove European restrictions on patenting software. They have also threatened European politicians that IBM might close down local facilities if software patents are not legalised in Europe. IBM has also prevented the US government from conducting studies on the value of software patents for the national economy. In the wake of the Opensource hype, IBM's rhetoric has become relatively moderate, but nonetheless it is supported by real pressure. IBM has acquired approximately 1000 European software patents whose legal status is currently unclear. Given the great number of software patents in IBM's hands, IBM is one of the few software companies who may have a genuine interest in software patentability. Once software patents become assertable in Europe, an IBM tax of several billion EUR per year may be levied on European software companies."
For further reading go here : http://swpat.ffii.org/players/ibm/index.en.html
Don't forget that software patents are a big issue for software developers that use the BSD licence as well and that the BSD community has seen its fair share of litigation. This isnt just a Linux/GPL issue.
Same could be said about Theo de raadt, people on /. don't seem to like developers who stand up for what they believe in and don't compromise on what they believe in. I appreciate both Richard stallman and theo de raadt they both make software which has improved my life and they are not willing to compromise their views to make a quick buck and I respect that a lot.
Just looked at the pictures. Interesting design and all but it really looks like an out of place novelty building who's look won't be replicated again in a hurry. I don't think comparisons with the Sydney Opera House is fair as the sydney opera house fits in with its surroundings and enhances them. Ah well ...
"Hey dawgs! A major shout out to ZJ Boarding House where owner Mikke (with two k's!) and manager Matt hooked us Spotmates up with some 411 on buying the "right" surf boards. (See my video!) Yep, I've decided to take up surfing, and heard word on the street that ZJ Boarding House was the place to go!! They were awesome. I love it here on Main Street!
/. really want to read crap like this ? Concept aside does this story and the way that it is done appeal to anyone here at all. The shit that these people come out with is so contrived and cliched that it bends my mind. The only people (I hope) who could possibly appreciate such stylized phony crap like this are people who do not have the attention span to devote time and energy into reading this site.
Yo, Matt - man, thank you so much for the help. Reed and I are gonna seriously take you up on lessons, dude. And PS: we wanna hear some of your tunes!
Lates,
Kai"
Do people on
I mean who the fuck are their target market ? Insecure wannabe socialite teenage girls who are not allowed go out and have a real social life ? Scientologists who watch will and grace ? I mean where do they expect this to go ? I think this sort of thing could work if it were based around some sort of subculture and not a bunch of paper mache stereotypes.
I know what you mean this thing looks amazing but can one really justify paying so much for so little capacity ? I think the looks, the ogg support, the radio, the microphone and the form factor could swing it for some people (they nearly got me) but the price of this thing and the thought that you could just get an ipod mini for cheaper or an ipod for in and around the same price is sickening. I couldn't buy something like this with a clear consiounce but having said that I am really really tempted. If this was $150 - $180 I would probably cave and buy but I have a feeling its going to be more like $250-$300+.
Their are a lot of artists that don't see anything wrong with DRM in fact they believe that they have some absolute right to control what some one does/does not do with their song once they buy it. They see more control as a good thing, they see people being sued for sharing files on p2p networks as a good thing, they see making reverse engineering illegal as a good thing. These people are not even signed to major labels or making big money they are small time musicians/artists who see the world in terms of "How does this immediately benefit me". Not all small artists are like this but their definitely is a sizable group of them out their. They are like the file sharers they despise, greedy, shortsighted and blind to the consequences of their own actions. They don't seem to understand that if they get signed/employed by some one that they will not own the rights to 'their' work. They seem to have a 'if I made it then its mine mentality' that resides outside of the real world of the content creation industry.
The real problem with DRM as I have always seen it is what it costs us in terms of personal freedom, you can not have privacy on your computer and have an anyway effective DRM system. To be effective any DRM system has to have some third party (probably Microsoft) with the ability to check your files and verify if you own them or not. That third party has to be able to look at whats on your hard drive, it has to ensure that you can only run protected content only under certain circumstances. This puts a lot of power in the hands of that third party couple that with the ability to redefine at will the terms under-which people buy content (that license agreement you click yes to when upgrading to the new version of itunes) and you put a lot of power in the hands of that third party and the content owner.
Now the third party (in this case Microsoft) prioritizes the big content owners, they are the ones that make the rules, the third party merely collects a tariff for those who choose to travel its roads. The big content owners work together for their own interests, they are effectively a cartel and they do not have the little guys interests at heart at all. They control the distribution and the promotion mediums.
DRM is about control and as always the people with the biggest piles of money are the ones in control. You would think that this would be easy to explain to someone working in pizzahut trying to scrounge up enough money to make another release, you would think that they would at least empathize with the fact that in the main stream music business the only person who wins is the record company, not the artist and not the consumer. They always think that they will be different and that they won't be fooled into signing a bad contract.
DRM systems will always be flawed for a number of reasons. 1)Once the rights of a file has been cracked once and it has been moved to an unencumbered format then the cat is out of the bag and its going to be mirrored and download all over the place. 2) If your DRM hardware systems are in place (widely accepted) they are going to be their for quite some time. It takes people a long time to upgrade software/hardware and the rate at which you can get them to do this is limited. No system is perfect and so DRM will always be a race between the crackers and the manufacturers the speed limit on this race is the rate at which people are willing to fork over new cash for new systems that offer a limited upgrade in functionality.
The real problem lies with short sighted content producers who to my mind are just as much of a problem as the person who downloads everything and pays for nothing but can these people really be blamed for being insecure about what they own and wanting to make a buck doing something they love ?
These people need to see a solid alternative to the mainstream music industry that offer them a chance to organize performances, tours, promotions and sell their wares all in a way that does not screw the consumer. The internet has t
Fair point concerning IBM and a specific licence but if sun were to release java under an open licence I don't think they would offer it under one that would allow IBM the chance to run away with the ball. IBM may not have said release your source under the GPL but I harldy think they were expecting SUN to release their code under the BSD licence.
"They get the open source developers to help build the application, help people get buy in, then they take the codebase in house and work on it from there making improvements and selling it for mucho dinero."
:
uuuh doesn't the GPL, which was the licence I believe IBM asked java to be released under, prohibit this ? If they wanted to make changes and keep the changes in house then they could not publicly distribute it ie sell it if java was released under the GPL. This is one of the main strengths of the GPL it stops people forking and running. Linus Torvalds has even commented on this fact
"I personally think that the BSD license is a dead end for serious projects, since it inevitably results in forking with no way to re-join if it becomes commercially viable.
Forking a project is in my opinion hugely important, since forks are how all real development gets done, and the ability to fork keeps everybody honest (i.e. if you don't do a good job and keep your users happy, they can always fork the project and go on their own). But equally important is the ability to join back forks, when/if some group finds the right solution to a problem. And that's where the GPL comes in: you can really think of the whole license as nothing more than a requirement to be able to re-join a forked project from either side."
Plucker is cool but it has been around for quite a while now and I would describe it as a flagship open source app for palm. My point is its hardly new and most of the developers working on it now have been working on it for a long time, it is not a barromater of new developers taking interest in the palm scene.
Palmopensource.com is cool, I read the forums a lot when I was working on my project but it does kind of underline my point, the forums on palmopensource.com are very quite and most of the releases posted on it are old palm programs being updated for cobalt.
"Getting PalmOS ROMS is pretty easy - it took me two days or so from filling in the developers form to getting my password for full access."
For some unkown reason 4 people from my college were working on palm related projects, we all filled out the forms multiple times. None of us got access to the roms, in the end I had to give them the ones I got from a warez channel (ewww I shouldn't have to that). I couldn't rip mine of my palm vx cause I had a program which messed around with its rom image (cant remember programs name right now).
I like palm pilots but I can't help but feeling that the tide is turning against them with the army of cheap series 60 based phones on the market that provide most of the pda functions that the average user needs. For the power user who wants loads of bopo mulitmedia crap (I don't want this) pocket pc seems to be the way to go. I often wonder where palm will go to find a market, at the moment, with the purchase of treo, they seem to be going for the business phone market. I am not so sure about palms chances there as nokia make some pretty cool high end phones with much better (read simpler) interfaces then anything I have seen palm come up with. Ah well I guess only time will tell.
Recently I ended up doing a college project for my old palm vx(os 4) on my powerbook (it was a wiki). I used prc-tools and I developed it on os x in c. During the course of my project (8 weeks) I noticed a few things:
1) Most mailing lists relating to palm software development seem very very quite these days.
2) Not much new software seems to be emerging for palm compared to a year or two ago and all the open source stuff seems to be people just updating old programs to deal with palms new os's.
3) I thought palms docs (for stuff relating to os 3.5/4 anyway) seemed a bit crap.
4)from prc-tools home page "The current release, prc-tools 2.3, was released on 2003-09-18."
5)Getting access to palm os roms through offical channels was a total pain in the ass (I had to go to a warez channel after my requests were ignored time and time again).
My question is have things gotten any better ? From my own experiences and what I see on freshmeat interest in the palm platform seems to be dwindling. Any one care to comment ?