I don't think he was talking about a 'legal' religion. Downloading for free something that you should be paying to acquire is morally wrong. It might not be theft, but it's certainly stealing.
There shouldn't be a debate about drinking and driving. It's just plain stupid. Even if you mean 'a debate about the maximum quantity of alcohol you can take before driving', which by now is a pretty much solved problem everywhere.
Oh, and between an epidemic of measles, pox or rubella that wipes off half of the country, and a statistical nullity of children with autism, I'd choose the latter. Call me callous.
Of course, the matter of all the people changing into those clothes - and putting away their own clothes, and putting them back again - is irrelevant. No mention of the facilities that would allow dozens or hundreds of people to change at the same time in time for their flights. Nevermind the distribution and recovery of the uniforms. Nor the fact that your own clothes would go with you on the hand baggage, which puts your 'security solution' back at square -20.
Seriously, think things through before posting. The article speaks against exactly this 'security theatre' kind of half-assed bullshit.
You do realize that if photoshop was somehow available as an OS/FS package for Ubuntu, it still wouldn't go in the Ubuntu CD for the exact same reasons cited for GIMP?
"the UI is too complex, it takes up room on the disc, and 'desktop users just want to edit photos and they can do that in F-Spot.'"
It just sounds really implausible to me that somehow lawyers cannot actually work in Schenectady because the laws aren't published. Over here, laws aren't binding until published in the official bulletin, which you can find at least in the Library of Congress (no, this is not the USA).
Maybe you cannot find a single volume updated to yesterday, but I find it much easier to believe everything is available somehow (and no, I don't necessarily think they should be free, though at least you could go to a library).
By your own quote, even if he actually found the disk he wanted, it would then be outdated immediately.
Lastly, the problem you mention in your latest post isn't particular to this issue, but to every congress and law body that hasn't got an immediate transcription of the law available on the web.
Oh, cool. Then I guess you missed where they noted that
But Eiss also indicated he might find it sufficient to review a paper copy of the code, as needed, at a library.
White said copies of the code, with updates early this year, are on file at the Schenectady Public Library, Schenectady County Supreme Court Library, the Schenectady County Community College Library and several other locations.
No, it seems you don't think that documents can be available if not on the Internet. Hint: how do you think mankind has published laws so far? And how could you get a copy of your local code of law until now? And what do you think is stopping you from doing so? And what part of 'will be available for free after the work is done' did you not understand?
If you want, right now, the package of laws as they offer it, you pay that price. How is that different from the bookseller offering the code as a book and charging for it?
Furthermore, from the article:
But Eiss also indicated he might find it sufficient to review a paper copy of the code, as needed, at a library.
White said copies of the code, with updates early this year, are on file at the Schenectady Public Library, Schenectady County Supreme Court Library, the Schenectady County Community College Library and several other locations.
So you mean the problem is _less serious_ by the fact that it's been on _more_ Windows versions than stated? Maybe you mean that MS has said 'it's not a problem because this and that?'
From actually reading the post you answered to, what I wrote extrapolates quite easily. Reread the first and third paragraphs of the GP's post.
You answered a post that talks about piracy being the main argument for bnetd, and wonder why I bring the point forward to your comment? And suddenly it's my reading comprehension that's crooked?
It was a fairly nice attempt at changing the argument discussed and appear less dickish, but it ultimately failed.
Its funny how, if you replace Blizzard with 'the music industry', bnetd for BitTorrent and games for music, your post reads exactly like what RIAA execs often say.
Yet, since it goes in benefit of WoW's papa instead of the guys behind Britney, you get modded up instead of down as you deserve. Shameful, both for you in particular and for Slashdot in general.
A lot more people think the same way about music, not only the RIAA execs. If you feel that the boneheadedness from the RIAA gives you an excuse to pirate music, you have a very crooked moral and ethic system. Plus, you understand jack about modern justice. That you feel that this opinion ought to be downmodded just shows you're a dick.
Another question asked was if the Windows in question was legit - Yes, I bought him a OEM XP the last time I was there and installed it.
Ahem. You're not supposed to do that. That's not what one calls 'a legit Windows install'. Or am I confused? I thought OEM can't be bought separately from computers.
Or maybe he did want to say 'de jure, which has some sort of relevant meaning in the phrase, too. Just to save you the embarrassment of looking so stupid in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think he was talking about a 'legal' religion. Downloading for free something that you should be paying to acquire is morally wrong. It might not be theft, but it's certainly stealing.
There shouldn't be a debate about drinking and driving. It's just plain stupid. Even if you mean 'a debate about the maximum quantity of alcohol you can take before driving', which by now is a pretty much solved problem everywhere.
Oh, and between an epidemic of measles, pox or rubella that wipes off half of the country, and a statistical nullity of children with autism, I'd choose the latter. Call me callous.
If they are using their spam box emails to communicate with possible employers, I'd say they deserve all they get.
Or maybe I'm an idiot, and don't get sarcasm. Sorry.
Of course, the matter of all the people changing into those clothes - and putting away their own clothes, and putting them back again - is irrelevant. No mention of the facilities that would allow dozens or hundreds of people to change at the same time in time for their flights. Nevermind the distribution and recovery of the uniforms. Nor the fact that your own clothes would go with you on the hand baggage, which puts your 'security solution' back at square -20.
Seriously, think things through before posting. The article speaks against exactly this 'security theatre' kind of half-assed bullshit.
Edit -> Paste As -> New Image (Or Ctrl-Shift-V) could be interesting for you, then.
You do realize that if photoshop was somehow available as an OS/FS package for Ubuntu, it still wouldn't go in the Ubuntu CD for the exact same reasons cited for GIMP?
Those same reasons are valid for PS.
It just sounds really implausible to me that somehow lawyers cannot actually work in Schenectady because the laws aren't published. Over here, laws aren't binding until published in the official bulletin, which you can find at least in the Library of Congress (no, this is not the USA).
Maybe you cannot find a single volume updated to yesterday, but I find it much easier to believe everything is available somehow (and no, I don't necessarily think they should be free, though at least you could go to a library).
By your own quote, even if he actually found the disk he wanted, it would then be outdated immediately.
Lastly, the problem you mention in your latest post isn't particular to this issue, but to every congress and law body that hasn't got an immediate transcription of the law available on the web.
Oh, cool. Then I guess you missed where they noted that
No, it seems you don't think that documents can be available if not on the Internet. Hint: how do you think mankind has published laws so far? And how could you get a copy of your local code of law until now? And what do you think is stopping you from doing so? And what part of 'will be available for free after the work is done' did you not understand?
If you want, right now, the package of laws as they offer it, you pay that price. How is that different from the bookseller offering the code as a book and charging for it?
Furthermore, from the article:
What part of '[the laws will] be made available on the Web for free" didn't you understand?
I assume the normal means of studying the laws of Schenectady are still available.
The parent should be modded -1 Stupid.
As they say: "Get a brain, morans!"
I think the article meant the ads that are actually in Times Square. You know, on the buildings.
way to read the article, moron, the new site is a service you rent to create a specific q&a site around your own interest.
Because hiring _good_ developers is otherwise inexpensive, right?
You could also incorporate 'experience working with design patterns' into the interview process. Just a thought.
You could also hire better new developers. Or at least, ones that have design patterns experience.
So you mean the problem is _less serious_ by the fact that it's been on _more_ Windows versions than stated? Maybe you mean that MS has said 'it's not a problem because this and that?'
From actually reading the post you answered to, what I wrote extrapolates quite easily. Reread the first and third paragraphs of the GP's post.
You answered a post that talks about piracy being the main argument for bnetd, and wonder why I bring the point forward to your comment? And suddenly it's my reading comprehension that's crooked?
It was a fairly nice attempt at changing the argument discussed and appear less dickish, but it ultimately failed.
Its funny how, if you replace Blizzard with 'the music industry', bnetd for BitTorrent and games for music, your post reads exactly like what RIAA execs often say.
Yet, since it goes in benefit of WoW's papa instead of the guys behind Britney, you get modded up instead of down as you deserve. Shameful, both for you in particular and for Slashdot in general.
A lot more people think the same way about music, not only the RIAA execs. If you feel that the boneheadedness from the RIAA gives you an excuse to pirate music, you have a very crooked moral and ethic system. Plus, you understand jack about modern justice. That you feel that this opinion ought to be downmodded just shows you're a dick.
it's homophone, not homonym (things that sound the same, not things that are named the same).
You mean the 'good programmer reading client's spec' decompiler?
Ahem. You're not supposed to do that. That's not what one calls 'a legit Windows install'. Or am I confused? I thought OEM can't be bought separately from computers.
Or maybe he did want to say 'de jure, which has some sort of relevant meaning in the phrase, too. Just to save you the embarrassment of looking so stupid in the future.
I heard. Since I live in another American country, this is news to me. But they have no oil.