Big companies want patents to scare smaller companies. They don't care if the patents are valid, because it is too expensive to go before a court. Some lawyers in the U.S. charge $600 per hour. The U.S. government is being sold to anyone who has money.
People in other countries know the U.S. government is corrupt, but Americans either don't know or don't really care.
It's somewhat unlikely that someone who demonstrated a strong interest in New Zealand, and some knowledge of the country and the culture would be completely wrong, off by a factor of 10.
You said, "And Americans don't have a problem is exaggerated
self-importance?"
Are you implying that, if I say one thing is true, then therefore you
assume I think all other things are false?
No one in N.Z. kills other people as part of U.S. government policy. I
wouldn't say that some of those in power in the U.S. government have
"exaggerated self-importance". I think it is more accurate to say they
are extraordinarily arrogant to the point that their arrogance is crippling
mental illness. See George W. Bush comedy and tragedy and Coups Arranged or Backed
by the USA. Sadly, those in power in the U.S. government believe that it
is okay kill for profit.
I forgot to say that the linked web site is NSFW -- if your co-workers are sheep.
Also, the result of the N.Z. parliament making criticism illegal will be that the criticism becomes much, much worse. Tthe old rules were not followed, either. Quote from the article: "However, the old rules were frequently breached, as the media often used wider-angled shots or published photographs of MPs napping, reading comics, eating lollies, and in one notable case, giving another MP the finger."
What New Zealanders say about themselves is often much stronger than anything
Jon Stewart says.
Stories about New Zealand on Slashdot all seem to give the impression that
N.Z. is a country like the United States. Actually, only 4 million people live
there, so it is more like a city in the U.S. than the U.S. itself.
Anyhow, apparently some New Zealanders think that N.Z. has an
exaggerated self-importance. So they joke about their country. For example: Adult Sheep Finder"New Zealand's #1 Internet Dating Site". (The site is partly a
reference to the fact that raising sheep is the main agricultural activity in
New Zealand; although there are only 4 million people, there are 60 million
sheep.)
I doubt the N.Z. parliament will stop "satire, ridicule or
denigration". In fact, the idea is absurd. Remember, the story Alice in wonderland was partly a parody of the English king and queen, when saying negative things about
the monarchy was illegal. That was in England, and it is sometimes said that
New Zealanders are "more English than the English".
Quote: "German laws change and are being adapted for 'better' protection against something politicians obviously do not understand. It will become illegal to develop, use, or even possess KisMAC in this banana republic [i.e., Germany]."
It's amazing when someone calls his own country a "banana republic".
Managers who were older than 20 when the personal computer revolution began have seldom bothered to learn about the new technology. I guess we will just have to wait until the old dinosaurs retire.
It is true, I am intending to show disrespect for her work, not for her as a person. I consider the idea that someone with no technical knowledge cannot manage an effort he or she does not understand very obvious, and not controversial.
There are many, many links to Slashdot comments in which people say they have not been treated with respect when they tried to report bugs. Also see my list of 20 excuses that Mozilla developers give for not fixing bugs.
There seems to be a pattern of coding sloppily and then going back and fixing the sloppiness. Maybe you have another idea, but that is how it appears to me.
You say, "I honestly don't understand what the issue is..."
I have spent many many hours reporting bugs. As lots of people have said, if the bugs are especially difficult to fix, the Mozilla team becomes abusive. Read the links.
Often people write Slashdot comments without bothering to understand the discussion or bothering to read the information provided. You certainly didn't.
How could someone with no technical knowledge and little social ability help create team feeling and a feeling of responsibility in highly technical projects? Do managers need to understand what they are managing? Yes, of course.
Someone with no technical knowledge cannot run a technically oriented
company. The Mozilla Foundation needs someone competent. Winifred cannot be the leader of something she doesn't understand. That's Winifred
Mitchell Baker, the CEO of Mozilla, an extremely socially uncomfortable lawyer who became
CEO when no one thought there was an opportunity. Now that Mozilla Foundation
is making millions from making Google the default browser, Winifred can afford
to hire people to make herself look good.
There are many, many quirks in Firefox, not just Thunderbird, that should be fixed, but no technically oriented manager to organize that. For example, the CPU hogging bug has been there for at least 5 years. Winifred has insufficient control over those who work for her, because
she doesn't understand what they do. The Firefox CPU hogging and memory
gobbling bug would take some serious troubleshooting to find, and no one wants
to do the work, apparently. See Firefox development sometimes resembles playing.
Don't let ignorant and managers destroy your
programming efforts. Find some way to have them removed.
Question for a lawyer: Does Microsoft's deliberate allowance of piracy create
a case of estoppel?
Estoppel by silence:"A type of estoppel that prevents a person from asserting something when she had both the duty and the opportunity to speak up earlier..."
Since Microsoft allows piracy, can the company lose its copyright?
Microsoft definitely encourages piracy, in my opinion. For years,
local computer stores carried to office suite alternatives: Legal Microsoft
Office, and pirated Microsoft Office for $50. Word Perfect and Lotus could not
compete. I'm not sure what local computer stores are doing now.
"Foxpro was acquired by them. More importantly MS is still keeping the project alive after all of this time."
FoxPro is dead now. Killed by software's Dr. Death. There will be no more versions.
The twisty-turny non-standard things Microsoft did to FoxPro killed xBase.
People jumped to FoxPro, which was never enthusiastically supported by Microsoft management.
Estoppel by silence:"A type of estoppel that prevents a person from asserting something when she had both the duty and the opportunity to speak up earlier..."
Question for a lawyer: Does Microsoft's deliberate allowance of piracy create a case of estoppel?
Since Microsoft allows piracy, can the company lose its copyright?
Microsoft definitely encourages piracy, in my opinion. For years, local computer stores carried to office suite alternatives: Legal Microsoft Office, and pirated Microsoft Office for $50. Word Perfect and Lotus could not compete.
I'm not sure what local computer stores are doing now.
You said, "EB articles were highly respected in the scientific community."
Didn't you mean, EB article authors were highly respected in the scientific community?
The problem often was that the authors were apparently told something like, "Write 400 words on your subject". But 400 words was just not enough to make sense. That was my experience of EB.
When I was a teenager, I went to EB training for sales, and went with salesman on calls. "They claimed that they only tried to sell to people who had already expressed interest" sounds like something they would say, but it was not true in an effective way. If a child returned an EB postcard from a magazine, that was considered family interest, and a chance to exercise some tricky talk.
When I discovered how dishonest it was, I got away from EB fast.
Slashdot Mirror
Big companies want patents to scare smaller companies. They don't care if the patents are valid, because it is too expensive to go before a court. Some lawyers in the U.S. charge $600 per hour. The U.S. government is being sold to anyone who has money.
People in other countries know the U.S. government is corrupt, but Americans either don't know or don't really care.
See this billboard in New Zealand advertising pizza: Hell. Too good for some evil bastards.
Should have said, "No one in N.Z. kills other people as part of government policy."
My source is the New Zealand government: In 1988 there were 64,600,000 (64.6 million) sheep.
It's somewhat unlikely that someone who demonstrated a strong interest in New Zealand, and some knowledge of the country and the culture would be completely wrong, off by a factor of 10.
As in, "Hell. Too good for some evil bastards." Click the link to see who is evil.
In New Zealand, you can order pizza from Hell.
You said, "And Americans don't have a problem is exaggerated self-importance?"
Are you implying that, if I say one thing is true, then therefore you assume I think all other things are false?
No one in N.Z. kills other people as part of U.S. government policy. I wouldn't say that some of those in power in the U.S. government have "exaggerated self-importance". I think it is more accurate to say they are extraordinarily arrogant to the point that their arrogance is crippling mental illness. See George W. Bush comedy and tragedy and Coups Arranged or Backed by the USA. Sadly, those in power in the U.S. government believe that it is okay kill for profit.
I forgot to say that the linked web site is NSFW -- if your co-workers are sheep.
Also, the result of the N.Z. parliament making criticism illegal will be that the criticism becomes much, much worse. Tthe old rules were not followed, either. Quote from the article: "However, the old rules were frequently breached, as the media often used wider-angled shots or published photographs of MPs napping, reading comics, eating lollies, and in one notable case, giving another MP the finger."
What New Zealanders say about themselves is often much stronger than anything Jon Stewart says. Stories about New Zealand on Slashdot all seem to give the impression that N.Z. is a country like the United States. Actually, only 4 million people live there, so it is more like a city in the U.S. than the U.S. itself.
Anyhow, apparently some New Zealanders think that N.Z. has an exaggerated self-importance. So they joke about their country. For example: Adult Sheep Finder "New Zealand's #1 Internet Dating Site". (The site is partly a reference to the fact that raising sheep is the main agricultural activity in New Zealand; although there are only 4 million people, there are 60 million sheep.)
I doubt the N.Z. parliament will stop "satire, ridicule or denigration". In fact, the idea is absurd. Remember, the story Alice in wonderland was partly a parody of the English king and queen, when saying negative things about the monarchy was illegal. That was in England, and it is sometimes said that New Zealanders are "more English than the English".
Quote: "German laws change and are being adapted for 'better' protection against something politicians obviously do not understand. It will become illegal to develop, use, or even possess KisMAC in this banana republic [i.e., Germany]."
It's amazing when someone calls his own country a "banana republic".
Managers who were older than 20 when the personal computer revolution began have seldom bothered to learn about the new technology. I guess we will just have to wait until the old dinosaurs retire.
The basic issue is whether someone with no technical knowledge can manage a technical project competently I say no.
It also appears to me that Mozilla Foundation suffers from management that lacks insight.
It is true, I am intending to show disrespect for her work, not for her as a person. I consider the idea that someone with no technical knowledge cannot manage an effort he or she does not understand very obvious, and not controversial.
There are many, many links to Slashdot comments in which people say they have not been treated with respect when they tried to report bugs. Also see my list of 20 excuses that Mozilla developers give for not fixing bugs.
Think Firefox has been stable? Here is an authoritative list that says Firefox has NOT been stable: Crashes with evidence of memory corruption: Critical.
There seems to be a pattern of coding sloppily and then going back and fixing the sloppiness. Maybe you have another idea, but that is how it appears to me.
You say, "I honestly don't understand what the issue is..."
That's true.
You are quite abusive for someone who is accusing someone else of being abusive.
Also, you didn't bother to read the links provided, which lead to other links, which lead to several bug reports by myself and others.
Her name is Winifred Mitchell Baker.
I have spent many many hours reporting bugs. As lots of people have said, if the bugs are especially difficult to fix, the Mozilla team becomes abusive. Read the links.
Often people write Slashdot comments without bothering to understand the discussion or bothering to read the information provided. You certainly didn't.
"... she's not doing her job and she should be replaced by someone who will do what's necessary at that level."
Exactly. Winifred has had many years and has definitely not created an organized team. See Firefox development sometimes resembles playing, and the links there.
How could someone with no technical knowledge and little social ability help create team feeling and a feeling of responsibility in highly technical projects? Do managers need to understand what they are managing? Yes, of course.
How can Mozilla Foundation take the position that it has no responsibility for add-ons when it recommends them?
Someone with no technical knowledge cannot run a technically oriented company. The Mozilla Foundation needs someone competent. Winifred cannot be the leader of something she doesn't understand. That's Winifred Mitchell Baker, the CEO of Mozilla, an extremely socially uncomfortable lawyer who became CEO when no one thought there was an opportunity. Now that Mozilla Foundation is making millions from making Google the default browser, Winifred can afford to hire people to make herself look good.
There are many, many quirks in Firefox, not just Thunderbird, that should be fixed, but no technically oriented manager to organize that. For example, the CPU hogging bug has been there for at least 5 years. Winifred has insufficient control over those who work for her, because she doesn't understand what they do. The Firefox CPU hogging and memory gobbling bug would take some serious troubleshooting to find, and no one wants to do the work, apparently. See Firefox development sometimes resembles playing.
Don't let ignorant and managers destroy your programming efforts. Find some way to have them removed.
Question for a lawyer: Does Microsoft's deliberate allowance of piracy create a case of estoppel?
Estoppel by silence: "A type of estoppel that prevents a person from asserting something when she had both the duty and the opportunity to speak up earlier..."
Since Microsoft allows piracy, can the company lose its copyright?
Microsoft definitely encourages piracy, in my opinion. For years, local computer stores carried to office suite alternatives: Legal Microsoft Office, and pirated Microsoft Office for $50. Word Perfect and Lotus could not compete. I'm not sure what local computer stores are doing now.
I could give other examples.
IE 7, new software from Microsoft, just happens to cause problems with other software that competes with Microsoft.
Has that ever happened before?
If you say that, then their "license" is that anyone can do anything.
"Foxpro was acquired by them. More importantly MS is still keeping the project alive after all of this time."
FoxPro is dead now. Killed by software's Dr. Death. There will be no more versions.
The twisty-turny non-standard things Microsoft did to FoxPro killed xBase. People jumped to FoxPro, which was never enthusiastically supported by Microsoft management.
"Not to say Microsoft is some sort of angelical organization, but they are certainly not guilty of "killing" Netscape."
Dedazo, you should get some sort of prize. You were able to put "Microsoft" and "angelical" together in a meaningful sentence.
Estoppel by silence: "A type of estoppel that prevents a person from asserting something when she had both the duty and the opportunity to speak up earlier..."
Question for a lawyer: Does Microsoft's deliberate allowance of piracy create a case of estoppel?
Since Microsoft allows piracy, can the company lose its copyright?
Microsoft definitely encourages piracy, in my opinion. For years, local computer stores carried to office suite alternatives: Legal Microsoft Office, and pirated Microsoft Office for $50. Word Perfect and Lotus could not compete.
I'm not sure what local computer stores are doing now.
You said, "EB articles were highly respected in the scientific community."
Didn't you mean, EB article authors were highly respected in the scientific community?
The problem often was that the authors were apparently told something like, "Write 400 words on your subject". But 400 words was just not enough to make sense. That was my experience of EB.
Note that we are both using the past tense.
When I was a teenager, I went to EB training for sales, and went with salesman on calls. "They claimed that they only tried to sell to people who had already expressed interest" sounds like something they would say, but it was not true in an effective way. If a child returned an EB postcard from a magazine, that was considered family interest, and a chance to exercise some tricky talk.
When I discovered how dishonest it was, I got away from EB fast.