At the risk of stating the obvious, who can believe anything that SCO says? They've already proved that they are willing to do anything to inflate the value of their stock.
Okay, I can understand leaving out Antarctica, but who gets to break the news to Australia that their continent has been demoted and made subservient to Asia?
Speaking as a native, our elected officials do their utmost to ensure that Australia is subservient to everyone. Bend over and get arse-rammed is our policy.
Seriously, like anyone gives a damn what the UN does, they're irrelevant. We're too busy licking the US's butt to care what the UN thinks.
lots of companies will only buy wares that have support, even if they never get the support itself.
I always laugh when Microsoft issues a end of life/end of support statement - I can never tell the difference between their support and their lack of support.
I've found that the time it takes to get good (192kbps+) versions of songs off of a complete album is much longer and expensive than simply shelling out 10 bucks for the CD at a music store.
Well, you obviously don't live where I do. Here you have to sell your first born to afford a Britney single.
Could we be on the road to a post-scarcity society in the future where nobody is without the basic human necessities and most work is done for recreation or hobby purposes only? Could be, yet for some reason I think our nation's current Corporatocracy wouldn't look kindly on such blatant "communism."
Scarcity is not a 'real' problem. We've had the ability to feed the world for decades - the problem is political. First world countries live in a glut of everything whilst third world countries starve. That isn't going to change, there are always haves and have nots.
What?! My licence specifically says that I am allowed to make one (1) copy of myself for off-site back-up.
Yeah, but the first thing your new clone does is call Microsoft to 'activate' it's license, and then it deletes all your mp3s and rats you out to the RIAA.
Microsoft calls back and tells the clone to 'stop working', it promptly sits on the sofa and drinks all your beer and eats all the pringles.
SCO's lawyers send a lawsuit around later in the day, just in case there's IP infringements in your DNA.
Later that week you run into a copy of yourself at the mall and discover that someone has pirated you and put you on kazaa.
By the end of the month your new boss is You 2.0, the same features as you but costs twice as much and does half the work.
Fabulous, friendster for paedophiles. Do we really need to be taking the hard work out of networking for sex-offenders? How hard will it be to find like-minded individuals now.
Sure, some of this increased capacity comes from a proper layout of the cockpit, but much of it comes from training recieved from two Italian plummers and buttons A and B.
You only need one hand to hang on, that leaves the other... Oh, you mean with someone else?
Re:Is there a "blanket solution" to viruses?
on
20 Years of Virii
·
· Score: 1
Secondly, you are confused indeed if you see the elimination of terrorists as "war-mongering".
If you really believe the propaganda, then I think that you are the one who is confused. Are all these conflicts about dealing with terrorists? I don't think so.
Unhappy about Osama bin Laden? Well I guess your government shouldn't have trained and funded him in the first place. Cranky about Saddam Hussein, well same deal - don't create and fund your own enemies, then have the gall to say you are dealing with terrorists. By the way, found any WMDs yet? (Try looking in your own country, you've got plenty, but that's different isn't it.)
The problems I have with this 'lets call X a terrorist country and then invade' tripe are as follows:
The US will now invade any country that is not an ally if it suits them.
The US actions will set a precedent that will be followed by many others
The possibility for wars/conflicts becomes more likely - not exactly the best outcome
So let me get this straight: Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are the ones who are right, and the US is wrong?
This is exactly the sort of binary thinking that got you into this mess in the first place. I'm sure that SH and ObL and their followers think that they are as 'right' as your leaders do. Is it right to invade other countries? Is it right to ignore the UN? Is it right to destroy a country's infrastructure simply so that you can award the contracts to rebuild to your friends and family?
Here's a newsflash for you: killing people isn't right, no matter what 'excuse' you have.
America is a nation of terrible hypocrisy.
Re:Is there a "blanket solution" to viruses?
on
20 Years of Virii
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Turns out amazingly enough, negotiation was what succeeded in the end and not violence.
There is no oil in Northern Ireland
Because of 1, there aren't any war mongering Americans trying to 'free' the populace
Peace (Profit?)
America has no concept of compromise, it just assumes that it is always right.
Slashdot Mirror
Now we can get one device that does 5 things badly instead of 5 devices that do 1 thing well.
Multifunctional my ass!
Now if they could only find those pesky weapons of mass destruction ....
At the risk of stating the obvious, who can believe anything that SCO says? They've already proved that they are willing to do anything to inflate the value of their stock.
Now if they can just combine voting machines and P2P ...
Speaking as a native, our elected officials do their utmost to ensure that Australia is subservient to everyone. Bend over and get arse-rammed is our policy.
Seriously, like anyone gives a damn what the UN does, they're irrelevant. We're too busy licking the US's butt to care what the UN thinks.
If I had to pick between bone density loss or cancer - it's a no brainer really.
Since when is Amway a hate site?
I always laugh when Microsoft issues a end of life/end of support statement - I can never tell the difference between their support and their lack of support.
How 'bout a red star?
Well, you obviously don't live where I do. Here you have to sell your first born to afford a Britney single.
mutant n.
Scarcity is not a 'real' problem. We've had the ability to feed the world for decades - the problem is political. First world countries live in a glut of everything whilst third world countries starve. That isn't going to change, there are always haves and have nots.
Thanks to the transporter, they just 'beam' the scat fetishists to every public toilet.
Congratulations! You've just won a RIAA sponsored arse-raping.
It's traditional to use people like you to fuel a fire with which to burn spammers at the stake with.
Oh God! Not again!
However, selling your soul to the devil is always possible regardless of the economic climate.
Do you think that broadband has contributed to peoples attention spans becoming shor ... Click.
Yeah, but the first thing your new clone does is call Microsoft to 'activate' it's license, and then it deletes all your mp3s and rats you out to the RIAA.
Microsoft calls back and tells the clone to 'stop working', it promptly sits on the sofa and drinks all your beer and eats all the pringles.
SCO's lawyers send a lawsuit around later in the day, just in case there's IP infringements in your DNA.
Later that week you run into a copy of yourself at the mall and discover that someone has pirated you and put you on kazaa.
By the end of the month your new boss is You 2.0, the same features as you but costs twice as much and does half the work.
Fabulous, friendster for paedophiles. Do we really need to be taking the hard work out of networking for sex-offenders? How hard will it be to find like-minded individuals now.
Um, don't fighter pilots take speed?
Even astronauts don't want to eat that GM crap ...
You only need one hand to hang on, that leaves the other ... Oh, you mean with someone else?
If you really believe the propaganda, then I think that you are the one who is confused. Are all these conflicts about dealing with terrorists? I don't think so.
Unhappy about Osama bin Laden? Well I guess your government shouldn't have trained and funded him in the first place. Cranky about Saddam Hussein, well same deal - don't create and fund your own enemies, then have the gall to say you are dealing with terrorists. By the way, found any WMDs yet? (Try looking in your own country, you've got plenty, but that's different isn't it.)
The problems I have with this 'lets call X a terrorist country and then invade' tripe are as follows:
So let me get this straight: Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are the ones who are right, and the US is wrong?
This is exactly the sort of binary thinking that got you into this mess in the first place. I'm sure that SH and ObL and their followers think that they are as 'right' as your leaders do. Is it right to invade other countries? Is it right to ignore the UN? Is it right to destroy a country's infrastructure simply so that you can award the contracts to rebuild to your friends and family? Here's a newsflash for you: killing people isn't right, no matter what 'excuse' you have.
America is a nation of terrible hypocrisy.
America has no concept of compromise, it just assumes that it is always right.