Linux will never become fully compatible with Windows and Mac software, just as Windows will never become fully compatible with Mac software, and Mac will never become fully compatible with Windows software. Here are some reasons why:
1. Microsoft and Apple both need to make money. If Linux, being free, were just like them, they would lose market. Therefore, if Linux became just like them, the cheese will move.
2. Linux does not have 100% compatibility as a goal. It's not necessary for Linux's success. And make no mistake, Linux has succeeded. The only significant market where Linux is not a MAJOR player is the desktop. Supercomputers? Check. Servers? Check. Home automation? Check. Telephony? Check.
3. People who try Linux want it to be "better", for various values of "better". This demands that it be DIFFERENT. Read "Linux is NOT Windows", http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm
Consider the possibility that this is information/disinformation they WANT to be out, without the responsibility of actually releasing it. Just a thought.
The "original" is probably lost forever, true. But unimportant. We don't have the autograph copies of Homer's Odyssey and Iliad, Caesar's Gallic Wars, or any other ancient document, either, but there's no real dispute about what they say.
The New Testament, on the other hand, is the best-attributed document from antiquity, comparable in size to the writings of Homer, with 100x the documentary evidence. The work in the 19th, 20th, and 21st century textual criticism of the texts, based on still-extant early manuscripts and papyri, on early translations, and on the citations of the early church writers, has produced a consensus critical document that is source of most of the modern translations. (Look up Nestle-Aland 28 and UBS-5.) The citations of the early writers are quite important--with them alone, all but about 3 verses of the entire NT can be verified.
This results in a level of certainty approaching or exceeding 99% of the accuracy of the transmitted/reconstructed text, as well as validating that the Textus Receptus on which the KJV is based is STILL approximately 95% correct. And those places where there is still any uncertainty do not affect any doctrinal statements.
There's no question anymore that the documents said exactly what they say, and no question remaining of "errors creeping in over thousands of copies".
The Old Testament is harder. The texts in the Masoretic tradition were shown by the find of the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been meticulously and faithfully transmitted, even though the tradition prescribed destroying the original when the copy was completed. Further, the Septuagint, a translation into Greek by Jewish scholars approximately 220 BC, gives us a good idea of the complete OT text from before Christ. These are the major basis for the critical OT text.
Jesus probably spoke Aramaic, but his words weren't recorded until many years or decades later, in Latin and Greek.
Jesus certainly spoke Aramaic, that being the language in use in Judea at the time. He certainly ALSO read, understood, and probably spoke Hebrew, as that was part of the religious training of Jewish men. He probably also spoke some Greek, since that was the language of the Roman occupation and Jesus had no problem talking to Roman soldiers or to Pontius Pilate, who probably didn't go out of their way to learn Aramaic. He may even have spoken a little Coptic, since he spent part of his early childhood in Egypt.
The writings of the NT as extant are entirely Greek, with occasional Aramaic words thrown in. The earliest NT writing is probably 1 Thessalonians, by Paul of Tarsus, from the mid-50s.
However, Mark was probably being written about the same time, since Mark apparently predates Luke, and Luke obviously predates Acts, and Acts dead-ends at about the year 67. The most likely explanation of the abrupt termination of Acts is that it had been brought up to date, and there was nothing to add. Acts is also in many places an eyewitness account, as testified by the use of the pronoun "we".
Furthermore, the hypothetical "Q" document, if it existed, must ALSO have been extant by the time of the composition of Luke. That puts the recording of the sayings, actions and life of Jesus at no more than about 25 years after they occurred, well within the living memory and testimony of eyewitnesses, in a culture where memorization and oral transmission of tradition was more practiced than today. After all, if we want to remember something, we write it down--or email it to ourselves...
There are no texts attributed to Jesus.
Well, there are, but there's no reason to think they are genuine. The documentary evidence is much too late.
And most of his Apostles couldn't write, either.
The Jewish men were probably the most uniformly well-educated peasants in the entire world, as they were religiously required to be able to read Hebrew. But in any case, Mat
They actually know better, and acknowledge it in their advertising, although subtly.
"Own it today on Blu-Ray or DVD!"
They have advertised the product for PURCHASE, not LEASE. It's OWNED by the buyer, not LICENSED to them. After making that statement in their advertising, they can not enforce a "non-transferable license" unless we LET them.
eBooks SHOULD cost less, because costs of printing, distribution and storage are effectively ZERO. Previous analysis of this demonstrates that approximately 65% of the cost of a hardback is eliminated by the eBook (http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/03/08/1655202/publishers-warned-on-ebook-prices). So a hardback priced at $25 should be about $9 as an eBook.
I refer you to http://baen.com/ Best ebook sellers on the planet, in my opinion.
If the publishers were selling eBooks at a 65% markdown compared to their hardbacks, they would see less piracy. Baen books are hardly ever found on piracy sites, according to the publisher.
I am fully in favor of the first sale doctrine and the existence of a used market in eBooks and other digital media. But I also see the arguments opposing duplication. There is no question in MY mind that I OWN these piles of bits; but until the technology catches up, what I see as the ethical choice is to DELETE materials I transfer to others, to deal directly with the original publishers when I cannot ensure my seller is deleting their copy, and only do business with companies whose business practice reflects my own opinions. Like Baen.
It's the same problem that the printing press created: "anybody" could print and sell these books. It's what the copyright developed to control. By current copyright law, Ben Franklin was a pirate.
> Not owning a firearm does preclude you from being part of a "well regulated militia"
Errrrrrr, NO.
According to US law, you probably ARE in the militia. If you are an able-bodied male, 17-45 years of age, and are or intend to become a citizen, or you are a female in the National Guard, YOU ARE THE MILITIA.
See "10 U.S. Code  311 - Militia: composition and classes"
"UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES Subtitle A - General Military Law PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
Ãf 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are --
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."
As a member of the national militia, do you own a weapon or weapons similar to standard military issue, and are you familiar and proficient with their operation and maintenance?
And I'm sure the women who've been raped, robbed and murdered in their own homes feel that their treatment by law enforcement has been stellar and that their tormentors are all brought to justice.
Not as much as the women who've been robbed and murdered in their own homes by their own firearms. There are 2.7 times more of them. And certainly not as much as the women who have been murdered by people they knew with their own firearms. Thee are 21 TIMES more of them.
Not logically possible. The statistic the first poster posits must necessarily include EVERY member of the statistic the second poster posits, and therefore CANNOT be smaller. Any set can not be smaller than one of its own subsets.
Not even the most reactionary gun owner will claim that ALL gun owners are responsible. That said, 2600 out of 110 million gun owners is...about 1 in 42000, or.0024%.
In almost any rational discussion, this number rounds to zero.
When I was 11, my friend and I rode the bus downtown 15 miles each way, missed the start of "Star Wars", hung around for an hour and a half for the next showing, watched the movie, and rode the bus home.
30 mile round trip, 6 hours unsupervised, and we had no trouble at all. And as many have pointed out, the world is even safer now.
Yes, I know that "Anecdote is not Data". However, it is clear that:
* The Meitivs did NOT break current law, which does not cover outdoors (Why? The ones who made the law wanted to let their kids go to the park, that's what I'm thinking...); * The police will not accept the word of a child that they do not need any help and are on their way home; * The government will interrogate our children without our permission or presence because they are in school.
"Unfortunately, Rachel's maneuver placed the car in the intersection, going the wrong way. Her sudden appearance in the cross-lanes caused cars to veer in all three dimensions and windshields in at least a half dozen cars turned blue as the auto-pilots went into spastic fault-mode."
from "Let's Go to Prague!", by John Ringo.
In the Honorverse timeline, this is about 4020 AD.
Well, I did read the article. I did not immediately watch the video, and now that I have, I'm still not impressed.
The strength of the tool is NOT the averaging of multitudes of shapes, which is what is essentially advertised. Instead, it is in finding images in the set that conform to what the user selects: filtering, not combining.
So, the "average" of blue butterfly wings with this shape is that they are blue and have this shape. You're not AVERAGING, you're FILTERING.
Or, given this "average" nose, find the "average" ears.
This tool is not as demonstrated primarily an averaging tool, but a filtering tool to eliminate everything that is not arbitrarily close to the arbitrary average. I'm sure there are cases where that is useful, but it's NOT the described function.
Automatically correlating equivalency points is nice, but not new. Morphing between the images is fun, but not new. Autoalignment of equivalency points is nice, but not new.
You're probably ALREADY serving in the militia, by US law:
"UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES Subtitle A - General Military Law PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
à 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are --
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."
I have an unheated chicken coop. 100W is just enough to keep the ice on the water bowl thin most mornings, and the light is what triggers the hens to keep laying into the winter.
If I use a lower-wattage light, I get less heat. For my purpose, an incandescent bulb is 100% efficient.
Should I be installing a heat pump in my coop? I don't think so...
The original Wolfenstein wasn't a side-scroller, it was a top-down map. And if you got killed, you could avoid starting over by flipping open the disk drive, if you were quick...
> Add Castle Wolfenstein - the Apple ][ side-scroller...
> What the founders intended is that those that exercise their right to bear arms be members of a regulated militia.
"Regulated" doesn't mean what you think it means. In the context of the language in 1787, "well regulated" essentially meant "using standardized equipment".
>If all gun owners were compelled to be members of a militia...
You have this entirely backwards. By US law, you are probably already a member of the Militia:
"UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES Subtitle A - General Military Law PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are --
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."
As always, your "rights" have associated "responsibilities". Along with the right to bear arms, you have the responsibility to know how to use said arms and be prepared to take them up in defense of the nation and the Constitution.
As a militia member, do you know how to secure, maintain, and operate your arms? Do you even HAVE arms?
> tell the NRA they, as a group, will now be held responsible for the actions of their members...
Do you really think that all gun owners are members of the NRA? I assure you, they're not. NRA membership is about 4.3 million; number of gun owners in America, about 52 million. Further, the NRA is by no stretch of the imagination a "militia".
Further, the number of criminals with guns, compared with the number of responsible gun owners, is such a small percentage as to be ignored in most common circumstances.
> The meaning has been twisted over the years, but the original intent is obvious because it is literal.
The 2nd Amendment has not been twisted; it's a complex sentence, but not hard to understand. It is a dependent clause, followed by the independent clause. The independent clause, which stands alone, is:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
If you don't LIKE this, you have only one choice: have an amendment passed repealing the 2nd Amendment. Good luck with that.
From the BBC article: "The perception is that publishers are saving a fortune because they are not physically printing a book," he said. Actually, said Mr Evans, printing costs were a small fraction of the total outlay required to produce a book.
"All the costs are the people in the publisher's HQ and the writer's mortgage," he said, adding that these had not changed significantly with the rise of ebooks."
======== The PROBLEM with Mr. Evans' assertion is this:
Most of the other costs are one-time. Printing and distribution, though, go on and on, as long as the book is in print. But with ebooks, that cost is essentially ZERO. And distribution, as can be seen below, is NOT insignificant.
Author - Creation. 8-15% Royalties.
Publisher - Being the Curator, Polishing, Manufacturing, Marketing. 45-55% (includes Author's Royalties). Note that Printing accounts for just 10% of the book price.
Distributor - 10%.
Retailers - 40%.
Consumers. Just the paying part;)
An example found at BookFinder states a cost break-up that closely matched what my research turned up -
The wholesaler and retailer are handling REAL, PHYSICAL BOOKS and moving them around. That cost gets dropped.
And the cost of PRINTING the book goes away, too. That's another 10% or so.
That's 65%!
So an ebook should be about 35% the list cost of a hardback.
That's for popular fiction, essentially. Other markets have other margins. But eBooks are FOCUSED on popular fiction right now--the other markets are speculative niches so far.
Geez. What are they thinking, other than, "Let's abuse the public and steal their money!"?
Slashdot Mirror
Analog Hole.
Linux will never become fully compatible with Windows and Mac software, just as Windows will never become fully compatible with Mac software, and Mac will never become fully compatible with Windows software. Here are some reasons why:
1. Microsoft and Apple both need to make money. If Linux, being free, were just like them, they would lose market. Therefore, if Linux became just like them, the cheese will move.
2. Linux does not have 100% compatibility as a goal. It's not necessary for Linux's success. And make no mistake, Linux has succeeded. The only significant market where Linux is not a MAJOR player is the desktop. Supercomputers? Check. Servers? Check. Home automation? Check. Telephony? Check.
3. People who try Linux want it to be "better", for various values of "better". This demands that it be DIFFERENT. Read "Linux is NOT Windows", http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm
4. Linux is built on a different worldview. Read "In The Beginning Was The Command Line", http://cristal.inria.fr/~weis/info/commandline.html
Consider the possibility that this is information/disinformation they WANT to be out, without the responsibility of actually releasing it. Just a thought.
The Andromeda Strain was a satellite sample return mission gone wrong. It was from outer space, not Arctic ice.
Unprovoked? Greedo had a gun trained on Han's face, and had already said that Han's dead body was an acceptable substitute. Self-defense.
Han shot first. But NOT unprovoked.
That's just how things go in Mos Eisley.
Maybe we'll finally find out what John Ford told Maureen O'Hara to say John Wayne...a secret all three took to their graves...
Well, this IS veering off-topic, but...
What actually constitutes the original?
The "original" is probably lost forever, true. But unimportant. We don't have the autograph copies of Homer's Odyssey and Iliad, Caesar's Gallic Wars, or any other ancient document, either, but there's no real dispute about what they say.
The New Testament, on the other hand, is the best-attributed document from antiquity, comparable in size to the writings of Homer, with 100x the documentary evidence. The work in the 19th, 20th, and 21st century textual criticism of the texts, based on still-extant early manuscripts and papyri, on early translations, and on the citations of the early church writers, has produced a consensus critical document that is source of most of the modern translations. (Look up Nestle-Aland 28 and UBS-5.) The citations of the early writers are quite important--with them alone, all but about 3 verses of the entire NT can be verified.
This results in a level of certainty approaching or exceeding 99% of the accuracy of the transmitted/reconstructed text, as well as validating that the Textus Receptus on which the KJV is based is STILL approximately 95% correct. And those places where there is still any uncertainty do not affect any doctrinal statements.
There's no question anymore that the documents said exactly what they say, and no question remaining of "errors creeping in over thousands of copies".
The Old Testament is harder. The texts in the Masoretic tradition were shown by the find of the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been meticulously and faithfully transmitted, even though the tradition prescribed destroying the original when the copy was completed. Further, the Septuagint, a translation into Greek by Jewish scholars approximately 220 BC, gives us a good idea of the complete OT text from before Christ. These are the major basis for the critical OT text.
Jesus probably spoke Aramaic, but his words weren't recorded until many years or decades later, in Latin and Greek.
Jesus certainly spoke Aramaic, that being the language in use in Judea at the time. He certainly ALSO read, understood, and probably spoke Hebrew, as that was part of the religious training of Jewish men. He probably also spoke some Greek, since that was the language of the Roman occupation and Jesus had no problem talking to Roman soldiers or to Pontius Pilate, who probably didn't go out of their way to learn Aramaic. He may even have spoken a little Coptic, since he spent part of his early childhood in Egypt.
The writings of the NT as extant are entirely Greek, with occasional Aramaic words thrown in. The earliest NT writing is probably 1 Thessalonians, by Paul of Tarsus, from the mid-50s.
However, Mark was probably being written about the same time, since Mark apparently predates Luke, and Luke obviously predates Acts, and Acts dead-ends at about the year 67. The most likely explanation of the abrupt termination of Acts is that it had been brought up to date, and there was nothing to add. Acts is also in many places an eyewitness account, as testified by the use of the pronoun "we".
Furthermore, the hypothetical "Q" document, if it existed, must ALSO have been extant by the time of the composition of Luke. That puts the recording of the sayings, actions and life of Jesus at no more than about 25 years after they occurred, well within the living memory and testimony of eyewitnesses, in a culture where memorization and oral transmission of tradition was more practiced than today. After all, if we want to remember something, we write it down--or email it to ourselves...
There are no texts attributed to Jesus.
Well, there are, but there's no reason to think they are genuine. The documentary evidence is much too late.
And most of his Apostles couldn't write, either.
The Jewish men were probably the most uniformly well-educated peasants in the entire world, as they were religiously required to be able to read Hebrew. But in any case, Mat
They actually know better, and acknowledge it in their advertising, although subtly.
"Own it today on Blu-Ray or DVD!"
They have advertised the product for PURCHASE, not LEASE. It's OWNED by the buyer, not LICENSED to them. After making that statement in their advertising, they can not enforce a "non-transferable license" unless we LET them.
eBooks SHOULD cost less, because costs of printing, distribution and storage are effectively ZERO. Previous analysis of this demonstrates that approximately 65% of the cost of a hardback is eliminated by the eBook (http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/03/08/1655202/publishers-warned-on-ebook-prices). So a hardback priced at $25 should be about $9 as an eBook.
I refer you to http://baen.com/ Best ebook sellers on the planet, in my opinion.
If the publishers were selling eBooks at a 65% markdown compared to their hardbacks, they would see less piracy. Baen books are hardly ever found on piracy sites, according to the publisher.
I am fully in favor of the first sale doctrine and the existence of a used market in eBooks and other digital media. But I also see the arguments opposing duplication. There is no question in MY mind that I OWN these piles of bits; but until the technology catches up, what I see as the ethical choice is to DELETE materials I transfer to others, to deal directly with the original publishers when I cannot ensure my seller is deleting their copy, and only do business with companies whose business practice reflects my own opinions. Like Baen.
It's the same problem that the printing press created: "anybody" could print and sell these books. It's what the copyright developed to control. By current copyright law, Ben Franklin was a pirate.
https://xkcd.com/488/
> Not owning a firearm does preclude you from being part of a "well regulated militia"
Errrrrrr, NO.
According to US law, you probably ARE in the militia. If you are an able-bodied male, 17-45 years of age, and are or intend to become a citizen, or you are a female in the National Guard, YOU ARE THE MILITIA.
See "10 U.S. Code  311 - Militia: composition and classes"
"UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
Ãf 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are --
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."
As a member of the national militia, do you own a weapon or weapons similar to standard military issue, and are you familiar and proficient with their operation and maintenance?
Not logically possible. The statistic the first poster posits must necessarily include EVERY member of the statistic the second poster posits, and therefore CANNOT be smaller. Any set can not be smaller than one of its own subsets.
Just sayin'.
Not even the most reactionary gun owner will claim that ALL gun owners are responsible. That said, 2600 out of 110 million gun owners is...about 1 in 42000, or .0024%.
In almost any rational discussion, this number rounds to zero.
No doubt that is why some of the most active Esperanto organizations in the world are in China, Korea, and Japan.
Bonan tagon!
When I was 11, my friend and I rode the bus downtown 15 miles each way, missed the start of "Star Wars", hung around for an hour and a half for the next showing, watched the movie, and rode the bus home.
30 mile round trip, 6 hours unsupervised, and we had no trouble at all. And as many have pointed out, the world is even safer now.
Yes, I know that "Anecdote is not Data". However, it is clear that:
* The Meitivs did NOT break current law, which does not cover outdoors (Why? The ones who made the law wanted to let their kids go to the park, that's what I'm thinking...);
* The police will not accept the word of a child that they do not need any help and are on their way home;
* The government will interrogate our children without our permission or presence because they are in school.
I'm on the Meitiv's side here, obviously.
Because nerds have kids, too.
"Unfortunately, Rachel's maneuver placed the car in the intersection, going the wrong way. Her sudden appearance in the cross-lanes caused cars to veer in all three dimensions and windshields in at least a half dozen cars turned blue as the auto-pilots went into spastic fault-mode."
from "Let's Go to Prague!", by John Ringo.
In the Honorverse timeline, this is about 4020 AD.
Well, I did read the article. I did not immediately watch the video, and now that I have, I'm still not impressed.
The strength of the tool is NOT the averaging of multitudes of shapes, which is what is essentially advertised. Instead, it is in finding images in the set that conform to what the user selects: filtering, not combining.
So, the "average" of blue butterfly wings with this shape is that they are blue and have this shape. You're not AVERAGING, you're FILTERING.
Or, given this "average" nose, find the "average" ears.
This tool is not as demonstrated primarily an averaging tool, but a filtering tool to eliminate everything that is not arbitrarily close to the arbitrary average. I'm sure there are cases where that is useful, but it's NOT the described function.
Automatically correlating equivalency points is nice, but not new. Morphing between the images is fun, but not new. Autoalignment of equivalency points is nice, but not new.
Putting it all in one tool is good, though.
So...what the software demonstrates is that if you line up all the pictures of cats by centering them on their noses, you will CLEARLY see...
The rest is blurry and remarkably uninformative.
There needs to be a LOT more intelligence, either machine or human, applied to this before it is remarkable.
You're probably ALREADY serving in the militia, by US law:
"UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
à 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are --
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."
They'll poll damn well after the next attack ...
And they'll STILL be wrong.
I have an unheated chicken coop. 100W is just enough to keep the ice on the water bowl thin most mornings, and the light is what triggers the hens to keep laying into the winter.
If I use a lower-wattage light, I get less heat. For my purpose, an incandescent bulb is 100% efficient.
Should I be installing a heat pump in my coop? I don't think so...
So, both the physical S and N ends of the sun are magnetic S? Where is the N magnetic pole?
Big damn monopole.
The original Wolfenstein wasn't a side-scroller, it was a top-down map. And if you got killed, you could avoid starting over by flipping open the disk drive, if you were quick...
> Add Castle Wolfenstein - the Apple ][ side-scroller...
> What the founders intended is that those that exercise their right to bear arms be members of a regulated militia.
"Regulated" doesn't mean what you think it means. In the context of the language in 1787, "well regulated" essentially meant "using standardized equipment".
>If all gun owners were compelled to be members of a militia...
You have this entirely backwards. By US law, you are probably already a member of the Militia:
"UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are --
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."
As always, your "rights" have associated "responsibilities". Along with the right to bear arms, you have the responsibility to know how to use said arms and be prepared to take them up in defense of the nation and the Constitution.
As a militia member, do you know how to secure, maintain, and operate your arms? Do you even HAVE arms?
> tell the NRA they, as a group, will now be held responsible for the actions of their members...
Do you really think that all gun owners are members of the NRA? I assure you, they're not. NRA membership is about 4.3 million; number of gun owners in America, about 52 million. Further, the NRA is by no stretch of the imagination a "militia".
Further, the number of criminals with guns, compared with the number of responsible gun owners, is such a small percentage as to be ignored in most common circumstances.
> The meaning has been twisted over the years, but the original intent is obvious because it is literal.
The 2nd Amendment has not been twisted; it's a complex sentence, but not hard to understand. It is a dependent clause, followed by the independent clause. The independent clause, which stands alone, is:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
If you don't LIKE this, you have only one choice: have an amendment passed repealing the 2nd Amendment. Good luck with that.
From the BBC article:
"The perception is that publishers are saving a fortune because they are not physically printing a book," he said. Actually, said Mr Evans, printing costs were a small fraction of the total outlay required to produce a book.
"All the costs are the people in the publisher's HQ and the writer's mortgage," he said, adding that these had not changed significantly with the rise of ebooks."
========
The PROBLEM with Mr. Evans' assertion is this:
Most of the other costs are one-time. Printing and distribution, though, go on and on, as long as the book is in print. But with ebooks, that cost is essentially ZERO. And distribution, as can be seen below, is NOT insignificant.
For example, there is this article:
http://ireaderreview.com/2009/05/03/book-cost-analysis-cost-of-physical-book-publishing/
From the article:
"A Simple Model of Book Costs and an Example
The very simple break-up is -
Author - Creation. 8-15% Royalties. ;)
Publisher - Being the Curator, Polishing, Manufacturing, Marketing. 45-55% (includes Author's Royalties). Note that Printing accounts for just 10% of the book price.
Distributor - 10%.
Retailers - 40%.
Consumers. Just the paying part
An example found at BookFinder states a cost break-up that closely matched what my research turned up -
Book Retail Price: $27.95.
Retailer (discount, staffing, rent, etc.) - $12.58. That's 45%.
Author Royalties - $4.19. Exactly 15%.
Wholesaler - $2.80. Exactly 10%.
Pre-production (Publisher) - $3.55. That's 12.7%.
Printing (Publisher) - $2.83. Translates to 10.125%.
Marketing (Publisher) - $2. That's approximately 7.15%."
========
So, here's my take:
The wholesaler and retailer are handling REAL, PHYSICAL BOOKS and moving them around. That cost gets dropped.
And the cost of PRINTING the book goes away, too. That's another 10% or so.
That's 65%!
So an ebook should be about 35% the list cost of a hardback.
That's for popular fiction, essentially. Other markets have other margins. But eBooks are FOCUSED on popular fiction right now--the other markets are speculative niches so far.
Geez. What are they thinking, other than, "Let's abuse the public and steal their money!"?