"Erkie gee whizzle guys that's a triple-negative!", shouted the nerdy-looking young fellow. Just then, a pig-skinned covered ball sailed through the air, breaking the glasses of the poor, grammatically-correct soul.
I really like this idea; users too easily click "Yes" on licenses designed to sell your soul to the developers. Creating clear icons specifying the software's behavior could potentially wake up users to the fact that they're being shammed.
However, as some previous posters mentioned, most naughty software is available only online; I can't go to Best Buy and purchase a Windows Clock synchronizer.:-) Given that most of the software in question is online only, and given the ambiguous lines of law over the internet, I don't see this working.
I read in a magazine recently that a Microsoft exec said Windows users would be "much safer" if we all would just download software patches from Windows Update.
According to the article, no one took him seriously.
So you're asking us to give Sun a free pass if they say no to IBM's proposal?
In the previous/. headline we hear about Richard Stallman telling us that software for money == bad morality, and we all nod our head. Now we see Sun keeping Java closed, trying to make money off it, and you tell us to look the other way?
Hell, that's a double standard if I've ever seen one.
I am reading this with utmost amazement; first I hear some liberal group say that broadband does more harm then good, then I hear someone tell me that we shouldn't have guns! Hahaha - who are you to tell us that we should not have guns? The whole point our wonderful democracy is the people are free to do as they wish, as long as thier actions are in accordance with our laws. Owning a gun is certainly lawful; perhaps you should read the Second Amendment, written by the founding fathers: Amendment II
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Slashdot Mirror
Offtopic? Guess I should've included the obligatory "Laugh. It's a joke". Mods have no sense of humor. :cries:
Let's hope that 'PlayFair' might appear in some other country now." Let's hope that 'weed smoking' might appear in some other country now.
"Erkie gee whizzle guys that's a triple-negative!", shouted the nerdy-looking young fellow. Just then, a pig-skinned covered ball sailed through the air, breaking the glasses of the poor, grammatically-correct soul.
I really like this idea; users too easily click "Yes" on licenses designed to sell your soul to the developers. Creating clear icons specifying the software's behavior could potentially wake up users to the fact that they're being shammed.
:-) Given that most of the software in question is online only, and given the ambiguous lines of law over the internet, I don't see this working.
However, as some previous posters mentioned, most naughty software is available only online; I can't go to Best Buy and purchase a Windows Clock synchronizer.
I read in a magazine recently that a Microsoft exec said Windows users would be "much safer" if we all would just download software patches from Windows Update. According to the article, no one took him seriously.
What a liar. We make backups; just most of the backups are of games that we don't own. :-)
Here here. If only they would've known that from the beginning, bankruptcy could've been avoided altogether.
I produce live television graphics systems
Otherwise known as watching porn.
So you're asking us to give Sun a free pass if they say no to IBM's proposal?
/. headline we hear about Richard Stallman telling us that software for money == bad morality, and we all nod our head. Now we see Sun keeping Java closed, trying to make money off it, and you tell us to look the other way?
In the previous
Hell, that's a double standard if I've ever seen one.
Wrong, check out
I am reading this with utmost amazement; first I hear some liberal group say that broadband does more harm then good, then I hear someone tell me that we shouldn't have guns! Hahaha - who are you to tell us that we should not have guns? The whole point our wonderful democracy is the people are free to do as they wish, as long as thier actions are in accordance with our laws. Owning a gun is certainly lawful; perhaps you should read the Second Amendment, written by the founding fathers:
Amendment II
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."