We do? Being supportive of people who make a conscious decision to rip off talented people who choose to charge for their works isn't something I'd be proud of.
Perhaps you should reconsider that opinion, lest you contribute to the popular opinion that/. is full of idiots.
Don't forget the miserable animals (i.e., me, possibly you, and a vast, vast majority of the civilized world) who indirectly support Monsanto (and other such evil corporations) thorugh our normal day-to-day operations.
I prefer to blame the animals who rely on an easily corruptible government to look out for such evil instead of keeping an eye out and avoiding it for themselves.
Of course, since you opted to go with DishNetwork that doesn't apply in your case. But to anyone else who hasn't made that decision, DirecTV + TiVo is extreme dual-tuner goodness. It also has the added bonus of storing the raw MPEG stream from the satellite instead of decoding and recompressing programs.
Sirius, while being slightly more expensive, promises to have entirely ad-free music channels. I'm not going to pay for something, and then be forced to listen to ads.
Besides, Sirius isn't associated with the Evil(tm) Clearchannel Corporation, the radio equivalent of Microsoft.
Cut access to people with infected servers? Considering that the only way to detect this is by actually taking advantage of the hole itself, somehow I'm not surprised that @home didn't want to make that decision.
Stop being so paranoid. There are other broadband providers in the world.
Stupidity, adj. - The state of being a GPL supporter and thinking that Bill Gates has any interest in exploiting your open source project for his commercial gain.
I think you're silly for comparing the Internet to a national highway system. Highways are a crucial part of commerce; the Internet is simply a luxury item to enhance communication between individuals.
Life as you know it would be significantly different without a vast system of roads to bring goods from point-A to point-B. Unless you work at an Internet-related company, I don't think you could say the Internet is something crucial to your standard of living. It certainly isn't to the vast majority of people.
Someone please tell me why one of the government's jobs should be spending taxpayer money on something as unnecessary as internet access? If I lived in Canada, I'd be horrendously disappointed.
Face it, as nice as the internet is, it shouldn't be the government's responsibility to make it available to everyone. This is like guaranteeing cheap HBO for your populace... it's silly.
Actually, it sounds pretty generous, if I'm reading it right. Assuming the only licensing charges for the MP3 codec will apply to people profiting from MP3 streaming, I imagine most of the slashdot community will be free to use it as they wish without paying a dime.
Not correct... my DSS receiver, manufactured by RCA (aka Thomson) belongs to noone other than me.
It's true that DSS providers will offer substantial discounts in return for a commitment to a certain amount of service, but I'm not aware of any "rental" service offered by the two remaining DSS companies.
But in the meantime, TiVo is one of the only companies (as well as one of the first) to deliver such a product. Thanks to my TiVo, I can watch decent TV whenever I want, instead of being tied to a schedule. I tell it what I want to watch, and it records it, in return for $9.95/mo.
I'm more than happy to pay for this service, and TiVo is more than happy to provide it. Why do you feel compelled to be so vengeful against TiVo? If you think it's a bad model, more power to you. Noone forced you to buy it.
If someone comes along and cobbles something together that grabs TV listings off the net, then more power to them. But in the meantime I'm glad that TiVo exists to provide me with this service.
Why does the typical slashdot poster always whine about being a victim of corporate America?
First you complain about how evil big corporations are using your Dell(tm) computer as you sip away on your Mountain Dew(tm), while wearing your Abercrombie and Fitch(tm) t-shirt and Nike(tm) sneakers.
Then you climb into your General Motors(tm) Aztek(tm) to grab a Big Mac(tm) from the nearest McDonalds(tm).
Instead of endlessly complaining about corporate greed, why don't you take a stand? Support the little guy. Speak out against advertising and abuse by corporate America. Turn around the terrible trend of consumerism, and convince others to help. Corporations, just like the government, get their power from you, me, and everyone else. And if enough people get fed up with the abuse, the support for those companies will dry up.
This post is mostly just an idealistic rant. But instead of whining about how evil big corporations are, why don't you try doing something to make a difference? You aren't completely powerless, you know.
The fallacy of the GPL is that it claims to be something that it is not. By itself, I have nothing against authors using the GPL for their own code. If they wanted to release their software under a license that required me to sacrifice my firstborn child to them in return for so much as looking at their code, more power to them.
But the GPL claims that it is all about freedom, when in reality it tries to be as much of a virus as possible. It claims to make freedom its central goal, when in reality it exists to encourage the socialist ideals of its creator. Meanwhile, it has quite a following in the slashdot community of people who stand behind the GPL as a device of "freedom" and for "destroying the enormous cruel proprietary software juggernauts". Usually, said people then go on to criticize every aspect of closed-source software, especially the part about making profits.
Making money off of hard work isn't nearly as evil as most GPL supporters try to make it sound. In reality, without the incentive of making money, most of the software innovations that exist today would have never been born.
Also, it's a shame you had to pollute what was otherwise a well thought out piece by spouting some of the usual free-software propaganda about MS' Kerb implementation. Feel free to think that MS tries to "embrace and extend" open-source technology. The reality of the situation is that Microsoft did nothing of the sort; they merely took advantage of open-ended parts of the Kerberos architecture so it could fit in with the Microsoft authentication/security model better. Claiming that what MS did was immoral and unethical is silly, and won't gain you any respect from people who aren't rabidly anti-Microsoft like yourself.
The challenge is that he's right. There's nothing "free" about the GPL if you're a developer that doesn't have the same views as RMS and the rest of the free software movement.
I'd love to see someone on slashdot actually prove his statement wrong.
(Yeah, I think the rest of what he had to say was typical MS babble, but he hit the GPL nail right on the head.)
You're not helping anyone by demanding he just give up whatever his idea is. What you don't seem to realize is that without an incentive, he (like most people) probably won't bother coming up with new innovations for you to just take from him.
What the GPL seems to ignore is that money is a great motivation for individuals. In an idealistic world where everyone was motivated to do great things for the good of the community, it'd be just fine. But the fact remains that most of society is motivated by greed and selfishness, instead of being good to others just for the sake of being good.
GPL toters would do good to realize that greed is a powerful force, and that not everyone shares their idealistic goals. Perhaps this world would be a better place if they did; but that's not how things are, and that's what most slashdotters need to realize.
Slashdot Mirror
True geeks don't care about static.
Well, it wouldn't be slashdot without morons posting who can't read the article.
Go read carefully. The sponsored links are COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the actual search results.
No cookie for you.
What's the point of selling high-speed internet access if you can't make enough money to cover the costs of said bandwidth?
Get a clue.
We do? Being supportive of people who make a conscious decision to rip off talented people who choose to charge for their works isn't something I'd be proud of.
/. is full of idiots.
Perhaps you should reconsider that opinion, lest you contribute to the popular opinion that
Don't forget the miserable animals (i.e., me, possibly you, and a vast, vast majority of the civilized world) who indirectly support Monsanto (and other such evil corporations) thorugh our normal day-to-day operations.
I prefer to blame the animals who rely on an easily corruptible government to look out for such evil instead of keeping an eye out and avoiding it for themselves.
DirecTiVo.
Of course, since you opted to go with DishNetwork that doesn't apply in your case. But to anyone else who hasn't made that decision, DirecTV + TiVo is extreme dual-tuner goodness. It also has the added bonus of storing the raw MPEG stream from the satellite instead of decoding and recompressing programs.
Pray tell oh humble supporter of Open Source, how do you plan to use source code to solve the problem of an incompetent user?
Sirius, while being slightly more expensive, promises to have entirely ad-free music channels. I'm not going to pay for something, and then be forced to listen to ads.
Besides, Sirius isn't associated with the Evil(tm) Clearchannel Corporation, the radio equivalent of Microsoft.
Anyone who considers RMS a benchmark of morality has a screw loose.
Cut access to people with infected servers? Considering that the only way to detect this is by actually taking advantage of the hole itself, somehow I'm not surprised that @home didn't want to make that decision.
Stop being so paranoid. There are other broadband providers in the world.
...in the small companies getting crushed by lawsuits, especially when all of those lawsuits centered around piracy.
Stupidity, adj. - The state of being a GPL supporter and thinking that Bill Gates has any interest in exploiting your open source project for his commercial gain.
I think you're silly for comparing the Internet to a national highway system. Highways are a crucial part of commerce; the Internet is simply a luxury item to enhance communication between individuals.
Life as you know it would be significantly different without a vast system of roads to bring goods from point-A to point-B. Unless you work at an Internet-related company, I don't think you could say the Internet is something crucial to your standard of living. It certainly isn't to the vast majority of people.
Someone please tell me why one of the government's jobs should be spending taxpayer money on something as unnecessary as internet access? If I lived in Canada, I'd be horrendously disappointed.
Face it, as nice as the internet is, it shouldn't be the government's responsibility to make it available to everyone. This is like guaranteeing cheap HBO for your populace... it's silly.
GPS is accurate enough. I've actually found that it's more accurate than the speedometer in my car at high speeds.
Actually, it sounds pretty generous, if I'm reading it right. Assuming the only licensing charges for the MP3 codec will apply to people profiting from MP3 streaming, I imagine most of the slashdot community will be free to use it as they wish without paying a dime.
Not correct... my DSS receiver, manufactured by RCA (aka Thomson) belongs to noone other than me.
It's true that DSS providers will offer substantial discounts in return for a commitment to a certain amount of service, but I'm not aware of any "rental" service offered by the two remaining DSS companies.
But in the meantime, TiVo is one of the only companies (as well as one of the first) to deliver such a product. Thanks to my TiVo, I can watch decent TV whenever I want, instead of being tied to a schedule. I tell it what I want to watch, and it records it, in return for $9.95/mo.
I'm more than happy to pay for this service, and TiVo is more than happy to provide it. Why do you feel compelled to be so vengeful against TiVo? If you think it's a bad model, more power to you. Noone forced you to buy it.
If someone comes along and cobbles something together that grabs TV listings off the net, then more power to them. But in the meantime I'm glad that TiVo exists to provide me with this service.
What is it that su will do that 'sudo bash' (or whatever your shell of choice is) can't do?
Yes, su can simulate users other than root, but that doesn't seem to be what you're interested in.
two words: mkisofs and cdrecord.
I'm sure we can both agree that complaining to slashdot is nothing more than preaching to the choir.
Why does the typical slashdot poster always whine about being a victim of corporate America?
First you complain about how evil big corporations are using your Dell(tm) computer as you sip away on your Mountain Dew(tm), while wearing your Abercrombie and Fitch(tm) t-shirt and Nike(tm) sneakers.
Then you climb into your General Motors(tm) Aztek(tm) to grab a Big Mac(tm) from the nearest McDonalds(tm).
Instead of endlessly complaining about corporate greed, why don't you take a stand? Support the little guy. Speak out against advertising and abuse by corporate America. Turn around the terrible trend of consumerism, and convince others to help. Corporations, just like the government, get their power from you, me, and everyone else. And if enough people get fed up with the abuse, the support for those companies will dry up.
This post is mostly just an idealistic rant. But instead of whining about how evil big corporations are, why don't you try doing something to make a difference? You aren't completely powerless, you know.
The fallacy of the GPL is that it claims to be something that it is not. By itself, I have nothing against authors using the GPL for their own code. If they wanted to release their software under a license that required me to sacrifice my firstborn child to them in return for so much as looking at their code, more power to them.
But the GPL claims that it is all about freedom, when in reality it tries to be as much of a virus as possible. It claims to make freedom its central goal, when in reality it exists to encourage the socialist ideals of its creator. Meanwhile, it has quite a following in the slashdot community of people who stand behind the GPL as a device of "freedom" and for "destroying the enormous cruel proprietary software juggernauts". Usually, said people then go on to criticize every aspect of closed-source software, especially the part about making profits.
Making money off of hard work isn't nearly as evil as most GPL supporters try to make it sound. In reality, without the incentive of making money, most of the software innovations that exist today would have never been born.
Also, it's a shame you had to pollute what was otherwise a well thought out piece by spouting some of the usual free-software propaganda about MS' Kerb implementation. Feel free to think that MS tries to "embrace and extend" open-source technology. The reality of the situation is that Microsoft did nothing of the sort; they merely took advantage of open-ended parts of the Kerberos architecture so it could fit in with the Microsoft authentication/security model better. Claiming that what MS did was immoral and unethical is silly, and won't gain you any respect from people who aren't rabidly anti-Microsoft like yourself.
The challenge is that he's right. There's nothing "free" about the GPL if you're a developer that doesn't have the same views as RMS and the rest of the free software movement.
I'd love to see someone on slashdot actually prove his statement wrong.
(Yeah, I think the rest of what he had to say was typical MS babble, but he hit the GPL nail right on the head.)
You're not helping anyone by demanding he just give up whatever his idea is. What you don't seem to realize is that without an incentive, he (like most people) probably won't bother coming up with new innovations for you to just take from him.
What the GPL seems to ignore is that money is a great motivation for individuals. In an idealistic world where everyone was motivated to do great things for the good of the community, it'd be just fine. But the fact remains that most of society is motivated by greed and selfishness, instead of being good to others just for the sake of being good.
GPL toters would do good to realize that greed is a powerful force, and that not everyone shares their idealistic goals. Perhaps this world would be a better place if they did; but that's not how things are, and that's what most slashdotters need to realize.