Is it just me, or is it very unsettling that the mastermind behind the revolution that has brought MP3, DVD and digital television into the lives of millions does not know the difference between illegal copying and theft? They are even in very different parts of the justice system (civil vs. criminal law IIRC, IANAL).
I'm impressed. And this has taken Microsoft how long to incorporate? And of course it is XP only.
Buy any computer today and you get that POS RealPlayer *and* MusicMatch. eMachines, Gateway, Dell, IBM, etc.
This has _nothing_ to do with Windows. In fact, this happens _against_ the will of Microsoft, who simply only want 'their stuff' preinstalled. But they cannot bully the OEMs anymore, thanks to being found guilty of abusing a monopoly. With any linux distro, an OEM can _always_ bundle what it wants. No need for a multi-$$$ lawsuit to ensure that.
Here's one for you - on my laptop running RH9, I get a message saying "Would you like to mount/dev/cdrom?" That's the pinnacle of user friendly for you!!
No, it is not, to me it would be a PITA as well. But wait, you can always... change your distro! Try out mandrake, debian, slackware, whatever. Find out which one you like most. You can even build your own distribution. And that is where the power of linux really shines. With Windows, you can choose for, well, Windows. It is always Microsofts way or the highway. Linux brings the power back where it belongs: the end-user.
Scraping the barrel a bit now perhaps? Not that this isn't possible in Windows XP or OS X anyway?
Can I do something like 'su - ' in a Windows console?
- Allow me to plug in and print to any printer available in my local hardware shop.
I used to have some funky old canon laserprinter. Worked ok. Currently an HP laserjet 5L, correctly found and configured @ install time. Windows only printers do not work...
- I'll extend that last point to ANY device, webcams, scanners, media players, video capture devices.
Philips usb webcam: works. Scanners are a bit more funky, but this is the fault of manufacturers who don't give drivers or even specs. Video: idem; devices need drivers.
- Efficient forward looking window management.
First you are agains multiple desktops and now this? Ever tried to run *any* modern OS on 640x480? And don't give me the 'Windows has MDI' line: MDI is a kludge which was needed because of a limitation in the Windows event notification system. Even MS recommends not using it anymore. MDI is a desktop on the desktop: ugly.
- Application installation. This is a joke.
This has been handled over and over again: you can install apt tools on rpm machines and vice versa. And all rpms I have seen can be obtained in different distro-flavours. This is a non-issue which is completely dwarfed by the need for registry cleaners in Windows.
And these work out of the box on a windows machine, apart from mediaplayer, which MS includes because they want to embrace, extend and exterminate into that market? I can create and view PDFs easily from my mandrake machine. Did Windows come with that functionality? Flash is also included in a number of distros. Does Microsoft bundle it as well? And I do not consider an obsolete MS-java a real java solution.
- System notification methods.
Say what? Surely you do not mean error messages, 'cause I've seen those. What then? "An audio CD has been inserted into the DVD drive.". OF COURSE, I JUST PUT THE BLOODY THING IN THERE!!!@#$@#$
In term of usability MacOS X surpasses anything on the market, so I will not compare a linux desktop to an Apple one. Right now you can argue if linux > Windows or Windows > linux in terms of usability. I just do not think your arguments are that valid.
On a serious note: why is the number of people who bring this argument to the table so low? Why do all those 'christian' republicans not think of what the bible (Hosea (8:7) tells them? "They that sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind".
*sigh*
Why do you think I typed a:-/ and said it was basically your word agains mine?
We don't need "numbers" to substantiate the fact that the community is vastly unhappy with Red Hat's move to the enterprise subscription model, which is causing financial and logistical pain.
What community? Is the community buying subscriptions? AFAIK companies are buying subscriptions; the community is free (pun intended) to use fedora. Why should the community be vastly unhappy by that?
People are in general moving away from RedHat, not toward it.
Numbers please, anyone can shout something like this. Last I heard was that RHAT had about 87500 subscriptions, of which 4000 entered last year. Read it today somewhere, but can't find the link anymore:-/ This does not sound like people moving away from RHAT, but it's your word against mine.
Actually, I mean "members of Al Qaeda" versus the people they disagree with.
My choice of words was poor and too black and white: members of Al Qaeda come in different flavours: the leadership will do everything in its power to keep their members as zealous as possible; once the US changes its tune a lot of extremists will loose their reason for being extremist.
And regarding that 'perfect muslim state': I almost wet my pants when there were clear signals coming from Iran that Taliban interpertation of islam was from the middle ages.
Nice debate, however. One of the most civil ones I've had on Slashdot.
Thank you. I try to do my best, but that is not so hard since I live in a country where personal freedom is considered a good thing (if you want to smoke cannabis, you can; you can even ask a police officer for a light), where everyone is entitled to social benefits, where consumers are protected, where politicians try to discuss and reason with each other instead of throwing dirt and one-liners, where government, employers and employees sit down together to improve the economy (polder-model), where everybody is entitled to medical support, and minorities are being listened to.
So, it is in fact only logical that I am not a hard-liner, but believe in a good discussion on equal terms, where all parties try to understand each other. Since you seem to be doing the same, we end up in a nice debate:-)
Fine...our foreign policy sucks and all Americans are assholes.
Yes, I believe US foreign policy sucks, but no, I never said nor implied that I think all Americans are assholes though; I try to treat Americans as human beings, with all their good and bad sides, like any other human being. I also fail to see any reason in the rest of your rant; I never even suggested any of the things you are summing up.
I voted for and support a person who's trying to clean up the mess left by 11 martyrs;
We've got a saying in dutch: "dweilen met de kraan open", roughly translated to "mopping with the tab still running". That is all I am saying: as long as the US continues its bullying foreign policy, it can expect more attacks from terrorrists, because that foreign policy is what got those terrorists started in the first place. Is that so hard to believe? Is that out of this world? Is that magical wisdom?
And what Bush is trying is futile: an open society can never fully protect itself agains terrorist attacks. To prevent those attacks the US would have to control _everything_ that comes into the country, and also control _every_ action of _every_ individual within its borders, and probably even beyond. Hello 1984.
Hi, I'm an asshole. Now are you happy?
No, I'm not, because I do not think you are an asshole. I do think you are refusing to see things from another perspective. And fyi: I do see things from different perspectives: if I were to 'meet' a palestine who approves of the bombings on busses and terrorist attacks I would do what lies within my power to make him understand that violence is always a short term, bad working 'solution' agains democratic countries.
Not that YOUR opinion matters to me anyway.
Hmm, your opinion _does_ matter to me. I see mutual understanding as a good thing. And why enter into a discussion with me when my opinion does not matter to you? Or are you just saying that to make me feel bad about myself, or that you are looking down on me?
(...) yet others still want to move here in droves for a 'better life'.
Oh, is that what you meant with 'love'. Well, I might be mistaken, but I think the reason that a lot of people want to move to the US (or the EU of that matter) is not because of its foreign policy, but because of simple economics: average living standards in the US are relatively high, at least higher than where they are coming from. And of course there are people who have to run for their lives because they said something that upset some government. But they are running because else they would live in constant fear for their lives, not because they 'love' the US.
So, what do we have: people who rather live in the US than in some second/third world country, and terrorists who want to let loose the dogs of war because of US foreign policy. I think the two are totally unrelated, and thus fail to see the logic in your original question on why not to ask why people 'love' the US.
Your second comment on the EU exactly proves my point. If entrance into the EU will cost others then screw them...they're not getting what they want, when they want it.
Wait a sec, I am afraid I cannot follow you: you said something like governments will do anything to maximize profit, I gave a counter example, and now you are saying something in which I see no logic. A, B and C help D and E, at the economic cost of A, B and C themselves. A, B and C are clearly not maximizing profits.
You ask us to review why we are so hated but fail to question why we are so loved.
Certainly not for your foreign policies, maybe for pop culture? Those terrorist attacks have not occurred because the US is so loved, so your argument is moot. If you want to know why these terrorists are targetting the US you need to understand why they have their reasons to hate you. Is that so hard to grasp?
ALL governments have an agenda to gain more and at an efficient rate and obtain as much as they can when they can.
Yup, and that's why Portugal was admitted to the EU, because they were so rich and would pay lots of taxes to Brussels. And also why Estland, Letland, Lithouania, Poland, Slovenia and others are being addmitted into the EU right now, because the other countries can rob them of all their resources. NOT! Admitting those new member countries will cost the 'old' member countries loads of cash. We're trying to make the world a better place here. Please do not confuse US foreign policy with the foreign policies of EU member states. In the future (and no, that is not next year, but probably > 10 years from now) this will prove to turn out for the best for all european citizens, and hopefully for all people in the world. So, no, not all governments are out to obtain as much as they can. The US governments certainly seem to operate in that way.
You seem like an intelligent person, please use that intelligence to try and look further than what you are being shown.
Lets see: I give lots of arguments, you wipe them away with an unfounded "answers to wrong questions", you fail to make any point at all and then use my own quote against me, again without any substance to support the use of that quote?
(...) Al Qaeda is fighting for the "peace" and prosperity of a select few at the expense of many (...)
Bingo! I take it you mean the Al Qaeda _leadership_. The leadership of such 'organisations' are likely to be the most extreme. The mass of followers are likely mislead and (ab)used by the leadership, which brings us to my original point: the US should change it foreign policy, force Israel to make peace with Palestine; this will take away the power the extremists have over the masses.
To say that Al Qaeda is interested in "freedom" or "peace" is a semantic flaw. Their definition of these terms are incompatible with the western world's at all.
If we were to meet face to face we would probably end up argreeing with each other for 99% about this subject. Al Qaeda, like (almost) all extremist movements, is abusing words to manipulate followers. I used these terms as a sort of devils advocate.
The "terrorists" coming from these countries have no interest in peace or justice; I duspute your characterization that they do.
Then what _do_ they want?
The kind of extremism that made Afghanistan the most primitive and backwards nation on earth is the same thing Al Qaeda is is fighting for.
Please have a look at the history of Afghanistan: it has been a fighting ground for decennia. Deprive a people of peace, hope, prosperity and education, and they will become primitive and backwards. Al Qaeda is, in its twisted way, 'fighting' to bring peace, hope, etc. to 'its' people.
Please do not assume these people are altruistic!
I certainly don't see them as altuistic, but they see themselves that way. The are fighting against 'the oppressors of muslims', which is a good thing according to the koran.
I do not want to "Understand" that kind of fucked -up thinking.
I do; it helps to see what one might do against it.
As you say, I am interested in changing US foreign policy to avoid pissing them off, but who knows what pisses off crazy people, when you get down to it.
That is certainly a good start, but if you understand how someone thinks, you will not piss them off very quickly if you do not want to.
I can't help thinking...If Al Qaeda is attacking us for our support of the house of Saud in Saudi Arabia, why haven't they been focusing on replacing the house of Saud? They are more interested in getting the USA out of the middle east, which basically makes them just racist.
AFAIK Al Qaeda is opposing the Saudi government, albeit not through attacks (yet). Flying a Saudi plain into some Saudi flat will likely kill a lot of muslims that they want to 'liberate'. And the members of the house of Saud themselves are well protected.
I think you missed my main point-I don't give a fuck what a terrorist says to justify his/her acts of terrorism.
When you know what 'justification' a terrorist uses to kill innocent people, then maybe you understand that this and previous US governments have provided both wood and sparks to ignite this fire. US governments have shown in the past not to give a damn about people in other countries; US governments support whatever regime as they see best for their own plans. THAT feeds terrorism. If you want to put a stop to terrorism, take away its breeding ground: change US foregn policy.
Fuck excuse me for not giving a fuck about someone who murder INNOCENT people and has a reason for it. I don't give a shit.
Does this mean you are willing to let the reason a terrorist became a terrorist keep on existing? Kill one terririst, another will take its place, as long as that other thinks it's the only way. Take away the breeding ground for terrorism, and it will fade away.
People who kill innocent people should follow the same fate!
No, they should be put on trial in a court of law.
Tell you what the next time someone shoots, burns, mutilates someone from my country (...)
And here lies a mayor source of the problem. Why should it be limited to someone from your own country? Why not have the same feelings for a 14 year old palestine girl who was shot without reason? Or an old lady sitting in a bus in whatever Israelian city? Why do you not ask your government to put more pressure on Isreal to make peace, and not war?
They want the world to be ISLAM-ONly
Sure, some fundamentalists want that. Just as there are fundamentalist christian nutcases who want the whole world to be christian. Just like the US educational system wants to have all students swear an oth to some deity. The fact is, most muslims just want peacefull coexistance, as long as they may hold their own beliefs. Look into history: Spain was once occupied by the (muslim) Moors; under their reign christians as well as jews could openly have their own religion.
You should open your eyes and understand they have one objective and that is convert the world to Islam. Just like the Palestinians want to wipe Israel off of the map and not live with them.
Yeah, right. Most palestines just want to have freedom, food on the table, a house to live in, and decent education for their children; most of these things they do not have. The main reason they are opposed to Israel is because in their eyes Israel is keeping them from their basic human rights and needs, and I cannot blame them for that view.
I'm all for a discussion with groups not out to destroy mine or any others way of life but they wouldn't talk to us if we begged.
??? They tried and talked, but we did not listen. That pushed the extremists among them into terrorism.
They want all of us dead or converted but we know they prefer dead.
Nope, they just want to be left alone, in peace.
They have no value of life period.
And US governments do, right? You stated yourself: you want to put a bullet through the heads of terrorists. Ever thought that those terrorists looked at the US and thought: "Well, they are so peaceful, they have never illegally overthrown a democratic government they did not like, they never invaded another country the last 40 years, they have never lied to their own people."? Large groups of people around the world see the US as a bullying oppressor (even a large number of people in Europe see it that way). Change US government actions, and you'll change that view and take away the breeding ground of terrorism.
The only thing they understand is violence so that's what they'll get.
You did not react on my arguments that this did not help with the IRA, nor with the ETA. You simply repeat your mantra.
Lastly we can try to understand all we want but it w
We live in a world that changed a few years back and one that will never be the same.
And why do you think this happened? Because terrorists do not like Mickey Mouse?
I am an independent/idealist who operates on common sense.
Then please, use that common sense.
We, as people in the US, are walking around daily as the biggest targets in the world.
Why not do something about it? Why not find out why you are hated so much by groups of people? Why not try and step into the shoes of a 16 year old palestine boy who had his brother killed simply because he was at the wrong place at the wrong time? Why not try and see how supporting a dictatorship (Cuba before Castro, Persia (Iran) when the Shah ruled there, Irak!!!) makes the people under that dictatorship view the US as a whole? Years and years of dirty tricks and interfering and meddling in other countries' are causing what you see now. Why not criticize your government and tell them to order the CIA to keep its nose out of other people's business?
I love my country and I love my life.
Why in that order? Why do you put your country before yourself or your loved ones? Do you know that 'training' people in pre-WW-II Germany to 'love' their country no matter what (Blut und Boden, blood and ground) let to the rise of nationalistic fascism?
(...) kill for twisted beliefs (...)
Sure. Whatever you do, do NOT try to understand the other side. Just call their believes 'twisted' and be done with it. Thats so much more easy than having to think about why the status quo is as it became.
They were bombed, the innocent died, and they came together as a nation.
The innocent died; yes, this is exactely what the terrorists want. In their eyes innocent people on 'their side' die every day, while the 'civilised' world actively supports their killers. They see no way out, except by terrorism. And as I see it, the spanish people did not come together as a nation, but they 'rewarded' their right wing government with a clear defeat in the elections, resulting in a left wing government.
I hope people can understand and Turn-about is fair play if they want to mug/print me.
Either you never read 1984, or you did not understand it fully. This is exactly what Bin Laden wants: he wants the people in the west to have to go through road blocks, random searches, an overall loss of personal freedom. Why, because in his eyes we then suffer the same as a lot of muslims under US-backed governments.
Extremism is a world wide infection that if we don't squash it then we are all doomed as are our freedoms.
Sure! Squash 'em all. Just like the ETA, they should be squashed! Yeah, that's what really works! Just squash em long enough, and they will stop. Know what? Spain has been trying to squash the ETA for > 35 years now. Guess they haven't tried long enough, ey? Same goes for the IRA; they are illegal since 1936. Yup, kill them all. Once the current generation of terrorists has been killed, there will not ever be a new generation of terrorists, no sir.
Please get me straight: I strongly dissapprove of terrorism; I have no sympathy whatsoever for people who kill or injure innocent people. There is however no way we are going to get rid of this by the kneejerk reactions seen in the US and some other countries. Trying to understand terrorists and seeing how and why they came to be terrorists in the first place might just be more useful than fighting them, because you simply cannot win. History has taught us that. Please, for the love of freedom, open your eyes and your mind; do not let yourself be brainwashed by power-hungry politicians and their media. You seem like an intelligent person, please use that intelligence to try and look further than what you are being shown.
The answer is to develop a system where common programming mistakes do not result in a security issue.
Get used to it. People are people. They make mistakes. We either cease being human, or develop a system that makes allowances for our humanity.
Can we do it?
Yes, we can, but not in any way you are suggesting. There is no way you can automatically correct programming 'mistakes', because there is no way of knowing what is a mistake and what is not. This is similar in complexity to the halting problem, which cannot be calculated.
The only way you can secure your apps is to prove mathematically that a piece of code does what you think it does; this you can learn in a proper CS curriculum. So, suggesting that Microsoft come up with a solution to this problem makes you loose your credibility from my POV.
(...) their OS (copied from DR and then Apple) (...)
Little correction: MS-DOS, to which you are referring I assume, was not copied from Digital Research; it was bought from a guy named Tim Paterson. It used to be called QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) before MS bought it; they changed a few things, renamed it and 'sold it' to IBM.
Well, that particular team wanted to put in 'more advanced features' in the game; better A.I., 3D graphics, surround sound, you name it. Unfortunately, when upper management saw what that team had created thusfar, they simply dismantled the development team and took what they had and put that into Windows. Nowadays that game is known as minesweeper.
If I had the choice of becoming Bill Gates or becoming Linus Torvalds, I would definitively choose for Linus' shoes.
Bill Gates is admired by all sorts of businessmen that also want a monopoly position and more cash than one person could ever spend. He is also not very liked among large groups of techies.
Linus on the other hand is hated by no one AFAIK (except maybe by Bill and 'MonkeyBoy'), he gets loads of respect from the tech world, is happily married, has a nice house and a nice car.
Sun successfully challenged MS in a court of law because MS 'polluted' java by putting incompatible stuff in java.lang and similar packages. You cannot (under the current Sun java license) distribute any Sun java stuff if you do that.
If Sun were to place java under the GPL Microsoft could pull the same trick, and this time get away with it, thereby successfully polluting java in such a way that a lot of developers will develop for MS-java only.
Are you sure? Because if it were GPL, what would be keeping MS from 'adding' classes in java.lang that call win32/.NET only functionality? They have done it before, you know.
Only the calls to the underlying OS would have to be in GPL-ed code, the actual win32/.NET would not. There is nothing in the GPL to prevent GPL code calling proprietary closed code. So, MS takes GPL java, add a few classes with close integration to windows, add that whole package (including all java source) to windows and bingo: a polluted MS only java variant!
Slashdot Mirror
Rick? Rick Berman? It's you right? Did not no you frequented /.
The plantifold interface clearly gave you away...
(...)many users will continue to steal music(...)
Is it just me, or is it very unsettling that the mastermind behind the revolution that has brought MP3, DVD and digital television into the lives of millions does not know the difference between illegal copying and theft? They are even in very different parts of the justice system (civil vs. criminal law IIRC, IANAL).
runas /user:administrator cmd.exe
/dev/cdrom?" That's the pinnacle of user friendly for you!!
I'm impressed. And this has taken Microsoft how long to incorporate? And of course it is XP only.
Buy any computer today and you get that POS RealPlayer *and* MusicMatch. eMachines, Gateway, Dell, IBM, etc.
This has _nothing_ to do with Windows. In fact, this happens _against_ the will of Microsoft, who simply only want 'their stuff' preinstalled. But they cannot bully the OEMs anymore, thanks to being found guilty of abusing a monopoly. With any linux distro, an OEM can _always_ bundle what it wants. No need for a multi-$$$ lawsuit to ensure that.
Here's one for you - on my laptop running RH9, I get a message saying "Would you like to mount
No, it is not, to me it would be a PITA as well. But wait, you can always... change your distro! Try out mandrake, debian, slackware, whatever. Find out which one you like most. You can even build your own distribution. And that is where the power of linux really shines. With Windows, you can choose for, well, Windows. It is always Microsofts way or the highway. Linux brings the power back where it belongs: the end-user.
Scraping the barrel a bit now perhaps? Not that this isn't possible in Windows XP or OS X anyway?
Can I do something like 'su - ' in a Windows console?
- Allow me to plug in and print to any printer available in my local hardware shop.
I used to have some funky old canon laserprinter. Worked ok. Currently an HP laserjet 5L, correctly found and configured @ install time. Windows only printers do not work...
- I'll extend that last point to ANY device, webcams, scanners, media players, video capture devices.
Philips usb webcam: works. Scanners are a bit more funky, but this is the fault of manufacturers who don't give drivers or even specs. Video: idem; devices need drivers.
- Efficient forward looking window management.
First you are agains multiple desktops and now this? Ever tried to run *any* modern OS on 640x480? And don't give me the 'Windows has MDI' line: MDI is a kludge which was needed because of a limitation in the Windows event notification system. Even MS recommends not using it anymore. MDI is a desktop on the desktop: ugly.
- Application installation. This is a joke.
This has been handled over and over again: you can install apt tools on rpm machines and vice versa. And all rpms I have seen can be obtained in different distro-flavours. This is a non-issue which is completely dwarfed by the need for registry cleaners in Windows.
- Proprietary standards. Java, flash, streaming audio/video.
And these work out of the box on a windows machine, apart from mediaplayer, which MS includes because they want to embrace, extend and exterminate into that market? I can create and view PDFs easily from my mandrake machine. Did Windows come with that functionality? Flash is also included in a number of distros. Does Microsoft bundle it as well? And I do not consider an obsolete MS-java a real java solution.
- System notification methods.
Say what? Surely you do not mean error messages, 'cause I've seen those. What then? "An audio CD has been inserted into the DVD drive.". OF COURSE, I JUST PUT THE BLOODY THING IN THERE!!!@#$@#$
In term of usability MacOS X surpasses anything on the market, so I will not compare a linux desktop to an Apple one. Right now you can argue if linux > Windows or Windows > linux in terms of usability. I just do not think your arguments are that valid.
Why not? I also use EMACS on my home machine to play music...
(ducks)
Hmmm. Lemme think. Not a), eh? Ehhm, answer b)?
On a serious note: why is the number of people who bring this argument to the table so low? Why do all those 'christian' republicans not think of what the bible (Hosea (8:7) tells them? "They that sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind".
*sigh* :-/ and said it was basically your word agains mine?
Why do you think I typed a
We don't need "numbers" to substantiate the fact that the community is vastly unhappy with Red Hat's move to the enterprise subscription model, which is causing financial and logistical pain.
What community? Is the community buying subscriptions? AFAIK companies are buying subscriptions; the community is free (pun intended) to use fedora. Why should the community be vastly unhappy by that?
People are in general moving away from RedHat, not toward it.
:-/
Numbers please, anyone can shout something like this. Last I heard was that RHAT had about 87500 subscriptions, of which 4000 entered last year. Read it today somewhere, but can't find the link anymore
This does not sound like people moving away from RHAT, but it's your word against mine.
Actually, I mean "members of Al Qaeda" versus the people they disagree with.
:-)
My choice of words was poor and too black and white: members of Al Qaeda come in different flavours: the leadership will do everything in its power to keep their members as zealous as possible; once the US changes its tune a lot of extremists will loose their reason for being extremist.
And regarding that 'perfect muslim state': I almost wet my pants when there were clear signals coming from Iran that Taliban interpertation of islam was from the middle ages.
Nice debate, however. One of the most civil ones I've had on Slashdot.
Thank you. I try to do my best, but that is not so hard since I live in a country where personal freedom is considered a good thing (if you want to smoke cannabis, you can; you can even ask a police officer for a light), where everyone is entitled to social benefits, where consumers are protected, where politicians try to discuss and reason with each other instead of throwing dirt and one-liners, where government, employers and employees sit down together to improve the economy (polder-model), where everybody is entitled to medical support, and minorities are being listened to.
So, it is in fact only logical that I am not a hard-liner, but believe in a good discussion on equal terms, where all parties try to understand each other. Since you seem to be doing the same, we end up in a nice debate
Fine...our foreign policy sucks and all Americans are assholes.
Yes, I believe US foreign policy sucks, but no, I never said nor implied that I think all Americans are assholes though; I try to treat Americans as human beings, with all their good and bad sides, like any other human being. I also fail to see any reason in the rest of your rant; I never even suggested any of the things you are summing up.
I voted for and support a person who's trying to clean up the mess left by 11 martyrs;
We've got a saying in dutch: "dweilen met de kraan open", roughly translated to "mopping with the tab still running". That is all I am saying: as long as the US continues its bullying foreign policy, it can expect more attacks from terrorrists, because that foreign policy is what got those terrorists started in the first place. Is that so hard to believe? Is that out of this world? Is that magical wisdom?
And what Bush is trying is futile: an open society can never fully protect itself agains terrorist attacks. To prevent those attacks the US would have to control _everything_ that comes into the country, and also control _every_ action of _every_ individual within its borders, and probably even beyond. Hello 1984.
Hi, I'm an asshole. Now are you happy?
No, I'm not, because I do not think you are an asshole. I do think you are refusing to see things from another perspective. And fyi: I do see things from different perspectives: if I were to 'meet' a palestine who approves of the bombings on busses and terrorist attacks I would do what lies within my power to make him understand that violence is always a short term, bad working 'solution' agains democratic countries.
Not that YOUR opinion matters to me anyway.
Hmm, your opinion _does_ matter to me. I see mutual understanding as a good thing. And why enter into a discussion with me when my opinion does not matter to you? Or are you just saying that to make me feel bad about myself, or that you are looking down on me?
(...) yet others still want to move here in droves for a 'better life'.
Oh, is that what you meant with 'love'. Well, I might be mistaken, but I think the reason that a lot of people want to move to the US (or the EU of that matter) is not because of its foreign policy, but because of simple economics: average living standards in the US are relatively high, at least higher than where they are coming from. And of course there are people who have to run for their lives because they said something that upset some government. But they are running because else they would live in constant fear for their lives, not because they 'love' the US.
So, what do we have: people who rather live in the US than in some second/third world country, and terrorists who want to let loose the dogs of war because of US foreign policy. I think the two are totally unrelated, and thus fail to see the logic in your original question on why not to ask why people 'love' the US.
Your second comment on the EU exactly proves my point. If entrance into the EU will cost others then screw them...they're not getting what they want, when they want it.
Wait a sec, I am afraid I cannot follow you: you said something like governments will do anything to maximize profit, I gave a counter example, and now you are saying something in which I see no logic. A, B and C help D and E, at the economic cost of A, B and C themselves. A, B and C are clearly not maximizing profits.
You ask us to review why we are so hated but fail to question why we are so loved.
Certainly not for your foreign policies, maybe for pop culture? Those terrorist attacks have not occurred because the US is so loved, so your argument is moot. If you want to know why these terrorists are targetting the US you need to understand why they have their reasons to hate you. Is that so hard to grasp?
ALL governments have an agenda to gain more and at an efficient rate and obtain as much as they can when they can.
Yup, and that's why Portugal was admitted to the EU, because they were so rich and would pay lots of taxes to Brussels. And also why Estland, Letland, Lithouania, Poland, Slovenia and others are being addmitted into the EU right now, because the other countries can rob them of all their resources. NOT! Admitting those new member countries will cost the 'old' member countries loads of cash. We're trying to make the world a better place here. Please do not confuse US foreign policy with the foreign policies of EU member states. In the future (and no, that is not next year, but probably > 10 years from now) this will prove to turn out for the best for all european citizens, and hopefully for all people in the world. So, no, not all governments are out to obtain as much as they can. The US governments certainly seem to operate in that way.
You seem like an intelligent person, please use that intelligence to try and look further than what you are being shown.
Lets see: I give lots of arguments, you wipe them away with an unfounded "answers to wrong questions", you fail to make any point at all and then use my own quote against me, again without any substance to support the use of that quote?
(...) Al Qaeda is fighting for the "peace" and prosperity of a select few at the expense of many (...)
Bingo! I take it you mean the Al Qaeda _leadership_. The leadership of such 'organisations' are likely to be the most extreme. The mass of followers are likely mislead and (ab)used by the leadership, which brings us to my original point: the US should change it foreign policy, force Israel to make peace with Palestine; this will take away the power the extremists have over the masses.
To say that Al Qaeda is interested in "freedom" or "peace" is a semantic flaw. Their definition of these terms are incompatible with the western world's at all.
If we were to meet face to face we would probably end up argreeing with each other for 99% about this subject. Al Qaeda, like (almost) all extremist movements, is abusing words to manipulate followers. I used these terms as a sort of devils advocate.
The "terrorists" coming from these countries have no interest in peace or justice; I duspute your characterization that they do.
Then what _do_ they want?
The kind of extremism that made Afghanistan the most primitive and backwards nation on earth is the same thing Al Qaeda is is fighting for.
Please have a look at the history of Afghanistan: it has been a fighting ground for decennia. Deprive a people of peace, hope, prosperity and education, and they will become primitive and backwards. Al Qaeda is, in its twisted way, 'fighting' to bring peace, hope, etc. to 'its' people.
Please do not assume these people are altruistic!
I certainly don't see them as altuistic, but they see themselves that way. The are fighting against 'the oppressors of muslims', which is a good thing according to the koran.
I do not want to "Understand" that kind of fucked -up thinking.
I do; it helps to see what one might do against it.
As you say, I am interested in changing US foreign policy to avoid pissing them off, but who knows what pisses off crazy people, when you get down to it.
That is certainly a good start, but if you understand how someone thinks, you will not piss them off very quickly if you do not want to.
I can't help thinking...If Al Qaeda is attacking us for our support of the house of Saud in Saudi Arabia, why haven't they been focusing on replacing the house of Saud? They are more interested in getting the USA out of the middle east, which basically makes them just racist.
AFAIK Al Qaeda is opposing the Saudi government, albeit not through attacks (yet). Flying a Saudi plain into some Saudi flat will likely kill a lot of muslims that they want to 'liberate'. And the members of the house of Saud themselves are well protected.
I think you missed my main point-I don't give a fuck what a terrorist says to justify his/her acts of terrorism.
When you know what 'justification' a terrorist uses to kill innocent people, then maybe you understand that this and previous US governments have provided both wood and sparks to ignite this fire. US governments have shown in the past not to give a damn about people in other countries; US governments support whatever regime as they see best for their own plans. THAT feeds terrorism. If you want to put a stop to terrorism, take away its breeding ground: change US foregn policy.
Fuck excuse me for not giving a fuck about someone who murder INNOCENT people and has a reason for it. I don't give a shit.
Does this mean you are willing to let the reason a terrorist became a terrorist keep on existing? Kill one terririst, another will take its place, as long as that other thinks it's the only way. Take away the breeding ground for terrorism, and it will fade away.
People who kill innocent people should follow the same fate!
No, they should be put on trial in a court of law.
Tell you what the next time someone shoots, burns, mutilates someone from my country (...)
And here lies a mayor source of the problem. Why should it be limited to someone from your own country? Why not have the same feelings for a 14 year old palestine girl who was shot without reason? Or an old lady sitting in a bus in whatever Israelian city? Why do you not ask your government to put more pressure on Isreal to make peace, and not war?
They want the world to be ISLAM-ONly
Sure, some fundamentalists want that. Just as there are fundamentalist christian nutcases who want the whole world to be christian. Just like the US educational system wants to have all students swear an oth to some deity. The fact is, most muslims just want peacefull coexistance, as long as they may hold their own beliefs. Look into history: Spain was once occupied by the (muslim) Moors; under their reign christians as well as jews could openly have their own religion.
You should open your eyes and understand they have one objective and that is convert the world to Islam. Just like the Palestinians want to wipe Israel off of the map and not live with them.
Yeah, right. Most palestines just want to have freedom, food on the table, a house to live in, and decent education for their children; most of these things they do not have. The main reason they are opposed to Israel is because in their eyes Israel is keeping them from their basic human rights and needs, and I cannot blame them for that view.
I'm all for a discussion with groups not out to destroy mine or any others way of life but they wouldn't talk to us if we begged.
??? They tried and talked, but we did not listen. That pushed the extremists among them into terrorism.
They want all of us dead or converted but we know they prefer dead.
Nope, they just want to be left alone, in peace.
They have no value of life period.
And US governments do, right? You stated yourself: you want to put a bullet through the heads of terrorists. Ever thought that those terrorists looked at the US and thought: "Well, they are so peaceful, they have never illegally overthrown a democratic government they did not like, they never invaded another country the last 40 years, they have never lied to their own people."? Large groups of people around the world see the US as a bullying oppressor (even a large number of people in Europe see it that way). Change US government actions, and you'll change that view and take away the breeding ground of terrorism.
The only thing they understand is violence so that's what they'll get.
You did not react on my arguments that this did not help with the IRA, nor with the ETA. You simply repeat your mantra.
Lastly we can try to understand all we want but it w
We live in a world that changed a few years back and one that will never be the same.
And why do you think this happened? Because terrorists do not like Mickey Mouse?
I am an independent/idealist who operates on common sense.
Then please, use that common sense.
We, as people in the US, are walking around daily as the biggest targets in the world.
Why not do something about it? Why not find out why you are hated so much by groups of people? Why not try and step into the shoes of a 16 year old palestine boy who had his brother killed simply because he was at the wrong place at the wrong time? Why not try and see how supporting a dictatorship (Cuba before Castro, Persia (Iran) when the Shah ruled there, Irak!!!) makes the people under that dictatorship view the US as a whole? Years and years of dirty tricks and interfering and meddling in other countries' are causing what you see now. Why not criticize your government and tell them to order the CIA to keep its nose out of other people's business?
I love my country and I love my life.
Why in that order? Why do you put your country before yourself or your loved ones? Do you know that 'training' people in pre-WW-II Germany to 'love' their country no matter what (Blut und Boden, blood and ground) let to the rise of nationalistic fascism?
(...) kill for twisted beliefs (...)
Sure. Whatever you do, do NOT try to understand the other side. Just call their believes 'twisted' and be done with it. Thats so much more easy than having to think about why the status quo is as it became.
They were bombed, the innocent died, and they came together as a nation.
The innocent died; yes, this is exactely what the terrorists want. In their eyes innocent people on 'their side' die every day, while the 'civilised' world actively supports their killers. They see no way out, except by terrorism. And as I see it, the spanish people did not come together as a nation, but they 'rewarded' their right wing government with a clear defeat in the elections, resulting in a left wing government.
I hope people can understand and Turn-about is fair play if they want to mug/print me.
Either you never read 1984, or you did not understand it fully. This is exactly what Bin Laden wants: he wants the people in the west to have to go through road blocks, random searches, an overall loss of personal freedom. Why, because in his eyes we then suffer the same as a lot of muslims under US-backed governments.
Extremism is a world wide infection that if we don't squash it then we are all doomed as are our freedoms.
Sure! Squash 'em all. Just like the ETA, they should be squashed! Yeah, that's what really works! Just squash em long enough, and they will stop. Know what? Spain has been trying to squash the ETA for > 35 years now. Guess they haven't tried long enough, ey? Same goes for the IRA; they are illegal since 1936. Yup, kill them all. Once the current generation of terrorists has been killed, there will not ever be a new generation of terrorists, no sir.
Please get me straight: I strongly dissapprove of terrorism; I have no sympathy whatsoever for people who kill or injure innocent people. There is however no way we are going to get rid of this by the kneejerk reactions seen in the US and some other countries. Trying to understand terrorists and seeing how and why they came to be terrorists in the first place might just be more useful than fighting them, because you simply cannot win. History has taught us that. Please, for the love of freedom, open your eyes and your mind; do not let yourself be brainwashed by power-hungry politicians and their media. You seem like an intelligent person, please use that intelligence to try and look further than what you are being shown.
The answer is to develop a system where common programming mistakes do not result in a security issue.
Get used to it. People are people. They make mistakes. We either cease being human, or develop a system that makes allowances for our humanity.
Can we do it?
Yes, we can, but not in any way you are suggesting. There is no way you can automatically correct programming 'mistakes', because there is no way of knowing what is a mistake and what is not. This is similar in complexity to the halting problem, which cannot be calculated.
The only way you can secure your apps is to prove mathematically that a piece of code does what you think it does; this you can learn in a proper CS curriculum. So, suggesting that Microsoft come up with a solution to this problem makes you loose your credibility from my POV.
(...) their OS (copied from DR and then Apple) (...)
Little correction: MS-DOS, to which you are referring I assume, was not copied from Digital Research; it was bought from a guy named Tim Paterson. It used to be called QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) before MS bought it; they changed a few things, renamed it and 'sold it' to IBM.
Well, that particular team wanted to put in 'more advanced features' in the game; better A.I., 3D graphics, surround sound, you name it. Unfortunately, when upper management saw what that team had created thusfar, they simply dismantled the development team and took what they had and put that into Windows. Nowadays that game is known as minesweeper.
I wonder if they will feature this wond'rous piece of melody and rhyme.
If I had the choice of becoming Bill Gates or becoming Linus Torvalds, I would definitively choose for Linus' shoes.
Bill Gates is admired by all sorts of businessmen that also want a monopoly position and more cash than one person could ever spend. He is also not very liked among large groups of techies.
Linus on the other hand is hated by no one AFAIK (except maybe by Bill and 'MonkeyBoy'), he gets loads of respect from the tech world, is happily married, has a nice house and a nice car.
And Linus is the better coder as well
Iraq had weapons of mass distruction, the USSR was an empire of evil ready to conquer the world.
Houston, we have a pattern.
Yes.
Sun successfully challenged MS in a court of law because MS 'polluted' java by putting incompatible stuff in java.lang and similar packages. You cannot (under the current Sun java license) distribute any Sun java stuff if you do that.
If Sun were to place java under the GPL Microsoft could pull the same trick, and this time get away with it, thereby successfully polluting java in such a way that a lot of developers will develop for MS-java only.
Are you sure? Because if it were GPL, what would be keeping MS from 'adding' classes in java.lang that call win32/.NET only functionality? They have done it before, you know.
Only the calls to the underlying OS would have to be in GPL-ed code, the actual win32/.NET would not. There is nothing in the GPL to prevent GPL code calling proprietary closed code. So, MS takes GPL java, add a few classes with close integration to windows, add that whole package (including all java source) to windows and bingo: a polluted MS only java variant!