You really want to subsidize the recording and movie industries with your money?
You do realize, that the recording and movie industry will have that money anyway, don't you? Either that, or the kids will be in debt for the rest of their lives.
You could offer a homeless man on the street a free sandwich, and if he had to walk a block to get it, Stallman wouldn't think it was free.
I understand you're joking, but your joke reveals a misunderstand of Stallman's position. In your example, the walking represents the price of the sandwich. The sandwich is not gratis or free from cost, but it may be free as in "free speech". Stallman has no problems with people making money from software, ie. the sandwich.
If, in your example, the homeless man was required not to share his sandwich with his friend or not to peek inside to see what's in it, that would be the breech of freedom that Stallman won't tolerate.
By the same analogy, the homeless man is allowed to peek inside and make the same kind of sandwiches and distribute them. He may sell the sandwiches, but he may not withhold the recipe. If he alters the recipe, he must make the alterations public.
You see? The bread and the toppings are the physical medium, the sandwich is the (compiled?) software and the recipe is the source code.
Dear Madam or Sir,
I am contacting you in the strictest confidence, because I know you to be an honest and reliable person. I happen to have *SCIENTIFIC PROOF* that brand Pear Anjou speaker cables offer greater quality audio than ordinary speaker cable. This proof would win me US$1000 000, which I am prepared to share evenly with you. I only need a brand Pear Anjou speaker cable, but since my family's assets have been frozen by an evil, oppressive regime, I can't afford the cable or the necessary expenses.
If you could can finance me with US$8000 I want to give you US$500 000.
Thank you for your confidence!
Cecil Rhodes,
Nigerian Audiophile
"Wanking" is rough-slang English from England, and means 'masturbating'. But Torvalds sure ain't one of us.
Speaking as someone from the same demographics as Linus, I can assure you that he's familiar with the meaning of the word. It makes sense to him (and to me) and, yes, he is definitely expressing an opinion. He said what he meant and he meant what he said.
The paper said that he may have died from exhaustion brought on by too many hours on the Internet.
The article gives the impression that the Internet has something to do with his death. Exhaustion is exhaustion, regardless of whatever reason you have to stay awek. He could have just been gardening.
It would definitely be more relevant to know whether he was using any stimulants to stay awake.
Islam is a religion, a set of beliefs and ideas. Not a person.... but I have a hard time parsing dissing a religion or set of beliefs itself as being hate speech.
You hit the nail on the head.
Yes, it's a fine line, but it's possible for me to think various religions, beliefs and ideas are utter crap without translating that into going out and harming their practitioners.
No, it's not a fine line. It's quite clear and simple: hating a religion is not hating a person or a group of people. I personally have problems with just about every religion in the world, but that doesn't mean I hate or even dislike the followers.
Ex-KGB, martial artist, absolutely no morality, ruthless, has probably been behind numerous deaths... Yeah, dude's a wuss.
Wow, I didn't know all that about Steve Ballmer! I suppose chair-throwing can be a martial art and given that he has threatened to fucking kill Google, I'm not surprised. ...But ex-KGB? Wait... You were talking about Steve Ballmer, weren't you?
No, he is not a philosopher of religion. In the last twenty years, he has tried to present himself as one, but the academy, both theist or non-theist, is getting a little worried about him.
He has hardly tried to present himself as a "philosopher of religion". He has quite clearly presented himself as an atheist and a scientist. He does, of course, philosophize against religion. Which academy are you talking about, by the way, and of what importance is this academy to Richard Dawkins?
Theist philosophers of religion propose arguments, and their non-theist colleagues, though they critically examine them, nonetheless believe that the whole enterprise has value.
That statement is quite non-informative. You already said that Dawkins is not a philosopher of religion, which indicates that you automatically exclude atheists from being philosophers of religion, which I'm prepared to agree with. In other words, the only non-theists you speak of are deists. Why should a deist philosopher of religion not find value in such an enterprise?
First of all, this is a proposed EU directive, not "federal law", a concept that doesn't exist in the EU. A directive means that member countries should implement certain requirements in the directive or there may be sanctions. It also means that these requirements may be exceeded, at the discretion of the member countries' legislative bodies. Finland is one country which already implemented a much harsher copyright law than the EUCD required and it will be free to do so in the future. Private filesharing might be excluded from this directive, but that only means that the member countries are free to legislate as they are paid^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H as they like.
Mr. Hawking has apparently just pretended to have an understanding of the un-understandable problem that sits at the beginning of anyone's understanding of everything: something exists, where nothing used to.
I think Prof. Hawking is arguing against the idea that nothing used to exist. From TFA: "If one believed that the universe had a beginning, the obvious question was, what happened before the beginning," Hawking said. You're absolutely right when you say that the summary is wrong. Hawking says the complete opposite: the universe does not come from nothing. Hawking is talking about bubbles, others are talking about God. Both seem to be right in the sense that nothing can come from absolutely nothing.
As I read it, the exact same problem has been reached again - and Religion and Science both require a leap of perfect faith over the gap that is The Beginning of It All.
No! Science does not require a leap of faith, because science has not decided yet. The jury is still out. "There are theories, but we still don't know" is what science is saying. That is definitely not a leap of faith. From TFA it is very hard to make out exactly what Hawking is really saying.
France has been a forward thinker in human rights for so many years(they're one of the only nations in Europe to accept refugees and grant asylum)
WhatwhatwhatWHAT? Just about every country in Europe accepts refugees and grants asylum. Granted, some do it less than others. Come to think of it, I can't name a single country that doesn't accept refugees. There might be some former eastern block country that doesn't accept refugees, but I can't think of one.
The role of science is not to manage public perception. It's to find out how things work.
...and thereby expand the amount of knowledge we have. Keeping the word "evolution" out of the public eye will help people ignore just how solid the evidence for evolution is and encourage them to think that it is "merely a theory" on par with the "theory" of intelligent design. This, in turn, will perpetuate the animosity towards science (evolution in particular) and will be counter-productive to fostering new scientists. This will, inevitably, have a negative impact on the speed with which new discoveries are made.
If we keep the word evolution in the public eye long enough scientifically, firmly and (I can't believe I'm writing this) politely, the creationists will have to face the fact that they are in the same position as those who claimed the earth was flat or that the sun orbits the earth.
Trying to hide what we know/believe will always be bad, especially when it's a scientific fact! Do not give them an inch!
Reading the title + summary I got the impression that Feisty would not offer any way of installing these drivers and that I would have to download the drivers for my Nvidia card separately. Fortunately, this is not the case, which you'll see in TFA. I say "fortunately" because many of us do not mind having proprietary software on our machines (at least not as much as RMS) and prefer to have all the goodies accelerated OpenGL et al. (Debian is still around for RMS & friends.) I can handle the installation of proprietary drivers, but some of my less proficient Ubuntu-using friends can not and such a decision would likely put them off using Ubuntu.
Lesson learned (again): Don't rely on/. for the full story - RTFA!
"Sure, what's next, Vista is the principal factor of the Global Warning. You know,/. is sometimes funny. So many smart people and at the same time so many idiots reunited in the same place... People are SOOOO DESPERATE trying to make their point abd to demonstrate their holy theories..." bla bla bla...
Perhaps, after your done reading TFA, perhaps you should try reading TF discussion? The knee-jerk reaction you are talking about simply hasn't happened. The only knee-jerk reaction I've seen here is yours: "AAGH!! STOP THIS/&%#%& STUPID MS-BASHING YOU #/&% LEFTIST ZEALOT BASTARDS!!!!". Sure, I agree that TFA might note have the smartest points ever, but those points are made in TFA and not on Slashdot.
"Did you not read the post you're replying to? There is no Irish or Welsh version of OS X because _OS X directly supports_ approximately 100 languages or variants of languages out of the box, plus a bunch of other localisation details, all of which can be applied on a per-user basis."
Yes, I actually read the post and tried out the instructions on our office Mac. The result? Nothing at all, except that the little flag up in the right corner switches between Swedish, US, Irish and whatever. However, the interface is still entirely in English. I can switch to Spanish, Swedish and several other languages, but not Irish.
Slashdot Mirror
You really want to subsidize the recording and movie industries with your money?
You do realize, that the recording and movie industry will have that money anyway, don't you? Either that, or the kids will be in debt for the rest of their lives.
You could offer a homeless man on the street a free sandwich, and if he had to walk a block to get it, Stallman wouldn't think it was free.
I understand you're joking, but your joke reveals a misunderstand of Stallman's position. In your example, the walking represents the price of the sandwich. The sandwich is not gratis or free from cost, but it may be free as in "free speech". Stallman has no problems with people making money from software, ie. the sandwich.
If, in your example, the homeless man was required not to share his sandwich with his friend or not to peek inside to see what's in it, that would be the breech of freedom that Stallman won't tolerate.
By the same analogy, the homeless man is allowed to peek inside and make the same kind of sandwiches and distribute them. He may sell the sandwiches, but he may not withhold the recipe. If he alters the recipe, he must make the alterations public.
You see? The bread and the toppings are the physical medium, the sandwich is the (compiled?) software and the recipe is the source code.
$ delete /bin
bash: delete: command not found
This sentence no verb and no desktop.
But your sentence desktop!
I love it! A whole post, consisting of nothing but a long Python quote, gets modded "5, Insightful". I love it!!!!
And all these years people thought I was just trying to be funny!
Dear Madam or Sir, I am contacting you in the strictest confidence, because I know you to be an honest and reliable person. I happen to have *SCIENTIFIC PROOF* that brand Pear Anjou speaker cables offer greater quality audio than ordinary speaker cable. This proof would win me US$1000 000, which I am prepared to share evenly with you. I only need a brand Pear Anjou speaker cable, but since my family's assets have been frozen by an evil, oppressive regime, I can't afford the cable or the necessary expenses. If you could can finance me with US$8000 I want to give you US$500 000. Thank you for your confidence! Cecil Rhodes, Nigerian Audiophile
It would definitely be more relevant to know whether he was using any stimulants to stay awake.
Wow, I didn't know all that about Steve Ballmer! I suppose chair-throwing can be a martial art and given that he has threatened to fucking kill Google, I'm not surprised.
First of all, this is a proposed EU directive, not "federal law", a concept that doesn't exist in the EU. A directive means that member countries should implement certain requirements in the directive or there may be sanctions. It also means that these requirements may be exceeded, at the discretion of the member countries' legislative bodies. Finland is one country which already implemented a much harsher copyright law than the EUCD required and it will be free to do so in the future. Private filesharing might be excluded from this directive, but that only means that the member countries are free to legislate as they are paid^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H as they like.
will a preinstalled linux prevoid the warranty?
If we keep the word evolution in the public eye long enough scientifically, firmly and (I can't believe I'm writing this) politely, the creationists will have to face the fact that they are in the same position as those who claimed the earth was flat or that the sun orbits the earth.
Trying to hide what we know/believe will always be bad, especially when it's a scientific fact!
Do not give them an inch!
Reading the title + summary I got the impression that Feisty would not offer any way of installing these drivers and that I would have to download the drivers for my Nvidia card separately. Fortunately, this is not the case, which you'll see in TFA. I say "fortunately" because many of us do not mind having proprietary software on our machines (at least not as much as RMS) and prefer to have all the goodies accelerated OpenGL et al. (Debian is still around for RMS & friends.) I can handle the installation of proprietary drivers, but some of my less proficient Ubuntu-using friends can not and such a decision would likely put them off using Ubuntu.
/. for the full story - RTFA!
Lesson learned (again): Don't rely on
"Sure, what's next, Vista is the principal factor of the Global Warning. You know, /. is sometimes funny. So many smart people and at the same time so many idiots reunited in the same place... People are SOOOO DESPERATE trying to make their point abd to demonstrate their holy theories..." bla bla bla...
/&%#%& STUPID MS-BASHING YOU #/&% LEFTIST ZEALOT BASTARDS!!!!". Sure, I agree that TFA might note have the smartest points ever, but those points are made in TFA and not on Slashdot.
Perhaps, after your done reading TFA, perhaps you should try reading TF discussion? The knee-jerk reaction you are talking about simply hasn't happened. The only knee-jerk reaction I've seen here is yours: "AAGH!! STOP THIS
"Did you not read the post you're replying to? There is no Irish or Welsh version of OS X because _OS X directly supports_ approximately 100 languages or variants of languages out of the box, plus a bunch of other localisation details, all of which can be applied on a per-user basis."
Yes, I actually read the post and tried out the instructions on our office Mac. The result? Nothing at all, except that the little flag up in the right corner switches between Swedish, US, Irish and whatever. However, the interface is still entirely in English. I can switch to Spanish, Swedish and several other languages, but not Irish.