don't be silly. DNA is more a proof than a tracking device. you can't tell where someone is at this instant just by knowing their DNA. you can by knowing their cell phone information (i think its called ESN number).
The only gamer I respect are those who have ascended nethack in normal mode (not exploring), or the guys who have gotten a gazillion points in the game, although thats not really hard to be honest.
Seriously though isn't there just something pointless in moving a mouse pointer over moving three-dimensional objects and clicking on them? I used to play counterstrike until I realized its nothing more than an overly patronized "Shoot the Duck" flash game.
I still play bzflag now and a little freeciv, but I gave away my Steam account to a foolish friend a while back.
You're clearly right. Microsoft is ripping off of Apple's OS X.
Microsoft once again shows their true colors my friends. They are not against stealing ideas from other people for their own gain. Its called ethical egoism if you didn't know. However they do not hesitate to use their large patent portfolio to block free software developers from writing programs.
You see Microsoft doesn't agree totally in the present day system. All that FUD about intellectual property and piracy makes sense now. They are clearly just using patents and copyrights as they see fit.
Personally I don't see any ethical problem with them copying OS X interface. However to stand on both sides of the fence as they do is very unethical. All I would like to see now is a Microsoft spokesperson say that sharing is good and indeed does promote scientific progress. Then I would be happy.
why would you want to go to school for a degree in computer science and then get a job developing proprietary software that takes away peoples freedom? become a waiter instead!
Why schools should use exclusively free software by Richard Stallman
There are general reasons why all computer users should insist on free software. It gives users the freedom to control their own computers--with proprietary software, the computer does what the software owner wants it to do, not what you want it to do. Free software also gives users the freedom to cooperate with each other, to lead an upright life. These reasons apply to schools as they do to everyone.
But there are special reasons that apply to schools. They are the subject of this article.
First, free software can save the schools money. Even in the richest countries, schools are short of money. Free software gives schools, like other users, the freedom to copy and redistribute the software, so the school system can make copies for all the computers they have. In poor countries, this can help close the digital divide.
This obvious reason, while important, is rather shallow. And proprietary software developers can eliminate this disadvantage by donating copies to the schools. (Watch out!--a school that accepts this offer may have to pay for future upgrades.) So let's look at the deeper reasons.
School should teach students ways of life that will benefit society as a whole. They should promote the use of free software just as they promote recycling. If schools teach students free software, then the students will use free software after they graduate. This will help society as a whole escape from being dominated (and gouged) by megacorporations. Those corporations offer free samples to schools for the same reason tobacco companies distribute free cigarettes: to get children addicted (1). They will not give discounts to these students once they grow up and graduate.
Free software permits students to learn how software works. When students reach their teens, some of them want to learn everything there is to know about their computer system and its software. That is the age when people who will be good programmers should learn it. To learn to write software well, students need to read a lot of code and write a lot of code. They need to read and understand real programs that people really use. They will be intensely curious to read the source code of the programs that they use every day.
Proprietary software rejects their thirst for knowledge: it says, "The knowledge you want is a secret--learning is forbidden!" Free software encourages everyone to learn. The free software community rejects the "priesthood of technology", which keeps the general public in ignorance of how technology works; we encourage students of any age and situation to read the source code and learn as much as they want to know. Schools that use free software will enable gifted programming students to advance.
The next reason for using free software in schools is on an even deeper level. We expect schools to teach students basic facts, and useful skills, but that is not their whole job. The most fundamental mission of schools is to teach people to be good citizens and good neighbors--to cooperate with others who need their help. In the area of computers, this means teaching them to share software. Elementary schools, above all, should tell their pupils, "If you bring software to school, you must share it with the other children." Of course, the school must practice what it preaches: all the software installed by the school should be available for students to copy, take home, and redistribute further.
Teaching the students to use free software, and to participate in the free software community, is a hands-on civics lesson. It also teaches students the role model of public service rather than that of tycoons. All levels of school should use free software.
Saving money should be the second most important incentive. Free software brings social good as we all know. However once students can learn programming and actually study the code of large programs we will see better education around computer science, specifically programming. Freedom in sofware promotes intellectual growth, clearly.
Slashdot Mirror
People have been playing videos on their ipods running linux for some time now.
Not to mention so many other companies have already released portable video players. Its nothing new people.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html
http://nanoscratch.com/ go here to post pics of your scratched nano or to view other peoples scratched nanos.
Why didn't they just give out toasters from wal-mart running netbsd?
Hey at least the man is consitent.
RMS has said that the real battle is non-free vs free not copyleft vs non-copyleft (aka BSD-style vs GPL).
Well RMS has said to me in an email that one reason he wrote Emacs was because vi was non-free.
If you didn't know Richard Stallman originally created emacs because vi was non-free propreitary software.
don't be silly. DNA is more a proof than a tracking device. you can't tell where someone is at this instant just by knowing their DNA. you can by knowing their cell phone information (i think its called ESN number).
speaking of cell phone 'usage', you should not own a cell phone because the are potential tracking devices.
The only gamer I respect are those who have ascended nethack in normal mode (not exploring), or the guys who have gotten a gazillion points in the game, although thats not really hard to be honest.
Seriously though isn't there just something pointless in moving a mouse pointer over moving three-dimensional objects and clicking on them? I used to play counterstrike until I realized its nothing more than an overly patronized "Shoot the Duck" flash game.
I still play bzflag now and a little freeciv, but I gave away my Steam account to a foolish friend a while back.
You're clearly right. Microsoft is ripping off of Apple's OS X.
Microsoft once again shows their true colors my friends. They are not against stealing ideas from other people for their own gain. Its called ethical egoism if you didn't know. However they do not hesitate to use their large patent portfolio to block free software developers from writing programs.
You see Microsoft doesn't agree totally in the present day system. All that FUD about intellectual property and piracy makes sense now. They are clearly just using patents and copyrights as they see fit.
Personally I don't see any ethical problem with them copying OS X interface. However to stand on both sides of the fence as they do is very unethical. All I would like to see now is a Microsoft spokesperson say that sharing is good and indeed does promote scientific progress. Then I would be happy.
why would you want to go to school for a degree in computer science and then get a job developing proprietary software that takes away peoples freedom? become a waiter instead!
In Soviet Russia, Nano is a text editor!
does ipod nano work with firewire or is it usb only?
you make a good point but apple has never been known to hype up simply upgraded models of their hardware.
i personally consider laptops to be one of the worst investments one can make. i especially wouldn't buy one for a child nor teenager.
What really upsets me is they made their video files in something other than ogg theora. Why?
I wonder what the vegans in the crowd have to say about this.
Why schools should use exclusively free software
e s/health/tobaccotrial/usa.htm.
by Richard Stallman
There are general reasons why all computer users should insist on free software. It gives users the freedom to control their own computers--with proprietary software, the computer does what the software owner wants it to do, not what you want it to do. Free software also gives users the freedom to cooperate with each other, to lead an upright life. These reasons apply to schools as they do to everyone.
But there are special reasons that apply to schools. They are the subject of this article.
First, free software can save the schools money. Even in the richest countries, schools are short of money. Free software gives schools, like other users, the freedom to copy and redistribute the software, so the school system can make copies for all the computers they have. In poor countries, this can help close the digital divide.
This obvious reason, while important, is rather shallow. And proprietary software developers can eliminate this disadvantage by donating copies to the schools. (Watch out!--a school that accepts this offer may have to pay for future upgrades.) So let's look at the deeper reasons.
School should teach students ways of life that will benefit society as a whole. They should promote the use of free software just as they promote recycling. If schools teach students free software, then the students will use free software after they graduate. This will help society as a whole escape from being dominated (and gouged) by megacorporations. Those corporations offer free samples to schools for the same reason tobacco companies distribute free cigarettes: to get children addicted (1). They will not give discounts to these students once they grow up and graduate.
Free software permits students to learn how software works. When students reach their teens, some of them want to learn everything there is to know about their computer system and its software. That is the age when people who will be good programmers should learn it. To learn to write software well, students need to read a lot of code and write a lot of code. They need to read and understand real programs that people really use. They will be intensely curious to read the source code of the programs that they use every day.
Proprietary software rejects their thirst for knowledge: it says, "The knowledge you want is a secret--learning is forbidden!" Free software encourages everyone to learn. The free software community rejects the "priesthood of technology", which keeps the general public in ignorance of how technology works; we encourage students of any age and situation to read the source code and learn as much as they want to know. Schools that use free software will enable gifted programming students to advance.
The next reason for using free software in schools is on an even deeper level. We expect schools to teach students basic facts, and useful skills, but that is not their whole job. The most fundamental mission of schools is to teach people to be good citizens and good neighbors--to cooperate with others who need their help. In the area of computers, this means teaching them to share software. Elementary schools, above all, should tell their pupils, "If you bring software to school, you must share it with the other children." Of course, the school must practice what it preaches: all the software installed by the school should be available for students to copy, take home, and redistribute further.
Teaching the students to use free software, and to participate in the free software community, is a hands-on civics lesson. It also teaches students the role model of public service rather than that of tycoons. All levels of school should use free software.
(1). RJ Reynolds tobacco company was fined $15m in 2002 for handing out free samples of cigarettes at events attended by children. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sci_tech/featur
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are permitted without royalty in any medium provided this notice is preserved.
This article sums up pretty well why copyleft is important over non-copyleft licenses like the BSD license.
"When it comes to defending the freedom of others, to lie down and do nothing is an act of weakness, not humility."
Saving money should be the second most important incentive. Free software brings social good as we all know. However once students can learn programming and actually study the code of large programs we will see better education around computer science, specifically programming. Freedom in sofware promotes intellectual growth, clearly.
I guess this story proves linux truely is portable, unlike the flux of bsd users deny.
Can someone tell me how debian is somehow more stable than other distros? (I'm talking about debian stable).
Also are they really going to drop support for some architectures?
Who cares fedora sucks anyway.