Those points he raised were far from "petty misdemeanors" and they are just as true as the accusations spouted from the other side. Seems you're playing the same game.
"We have a set of programming we are born with,..."
Your first mistake. No, we do not. Certainly not on the scale you're implying. If you have information to this effect, you should publish.
It is a geek's mistake to assume our intelligence is nothing more than a program, but it's understandable as it moved human intelligence into a realm they do understand.
I keep reading here about relevant results getting swamped, but I don't see it when I use Google. I have to wonder what all these searches have included that reaps the trash that mine don't.
Dixie Chicks? Bull. Totally free speech. She was able to say what she wanted before and after the hubbub. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from response. Your last paragraph is pap.
The idea that everyone who illegally uses a copy of some software product is either: a danger to society, an irretrievable thief, a tax cheat, or a supporter of terrorism is obscene.
It's also not what's being said except by people wanting to stir rhetoric. What's being said is they're criminals.
The most disgusting part of this, to get back to the point of my original point, is that all the aspersions cast upon those who engage in such piracy notwithstanding, they still wouldn't have paid for "it" anyway.
Disgusting as in "they're criminals and shouldn't be doing that" or disgusting as in "those criminals are getting they're feelings hurt? Couldn't tell.
Bull. Knowing how something works is not part of the process of experimentation. If I provide an experiment to prove something and it works, it will work regardless of the understanding of the executor.
Uh, no they don't. I still look over my shoulder in both directions and my even older friends do as well. From what I see on the streets, it's the younger drivers that don't bother looking.
Several points. It wasn't his creation, he created it for those who paid him; they weren't his keys, they belong to others and he was just holding them; attrition is something everyone faces. He is not a godlet, he is not unique, he is not irreplaceable -- regardless of his opinion.
His was a paid position, working for others. Those others are the owners and he is currently depriving them of access to their possession. One justifies that how?
You say if the market were free software prices would be lower, then mention Linox which is -- free. What you are actually saying is you like MS well enough to use their products (else you wouldn't even be interested in Vista, allowing it to wither and be replaced by less expensive brands), but simply want to force down their prices.
Uh, no. That's the other side of the free market coin. I get to decide the price I want to charge. If I overcharge, I lose.
I've worked at the PO. Mail travels through too friggin' fast for anything to be opened, read and closed. Also, the volume is prohibitive. The mere fact that you get your mail within a couple of days is proof it ain't happening.
Conspiracy theorists, however, tend to require proof of tracking of every piece of mail for all eternity in order to discount the conspiracy.
You contradict yourself. The IP would retard those disciplines, yet valuable ideas (in those same disciplines) are kept secret through guilds and lineages.
Sounds like IP is a much shorter version of guilds and lineages.
Slashdot Mirror
Not if it's slander or libel.
"someone must believe the allegations to be true"
Not true. Career defamation is sufficient.
Reread the constitution, amendment nine.
How do you know he didn't confront and ask? Um, "stealing back" is stealing. The proper (and safer) recourse is the legal system, right?
Since when is death a proper punishment for burglary.
If you don't want the danger, don't friggin' burgle someone's place. I have zero sympathy for criminals who reap reward.
Only your opinion. Explain why.
The law in the municipality of the residence.
Those points he raised were far from "petty misdemeanors" and they are just as true as the accusations spouted from the other side. Seems you're playing the same game.
Your saying so does not make it so. The Dems are just as above the populous as the Reps.
"We have a set of programming we are born with,..."
Your first mistake. No, we do not. Certainly not on the scale you're implying. If you have information to this effect, you should publish.
It is a geek's mistake to assume our intelligence is nothing more than a program, but it's understandable as it moved human intelligence into a realm they do understand.
I keep reading here about relevant results getting swamped, but I don't see it when I use Google. I have to wonder what all these searches have included that reaps the trash that mine don't.
I see you don't understand the word most.
Dixie Chicks? Bull. Totally free speech. She was able to say what she wanted before and after the hubbub. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from response. Your last paragraph is pap.
He actually took the password. Just because it isn't physical, doesn't mean he can't steal it.
The idea that everyone who illegally uses a copy of some software product is either: a danger to society, an irretrievable thief, a tax cheat, or a supporter of terrorism is obscene.
It's also not what's being said except by people wanting to stir rhetoric. What's being said is they're criminals.
The most disgusting part of this, to get back to the point of my original point, is that all the aspersions cast upon those who engage in such piracy notwithstanding, they still wouldn't have paid for "it" anyway.
Disgusting as in "they're criminals and shouldn't be doing that" or disgusting as in "those criminals are getting they're feelings hurt? Couldn't tell.
Bull. Knowing how something works is not part of the process of experimentation. If I provide an experiment to prove something and it works, it will work regardless of the understanding of the executor.
Uh, no they don't. I still look over my shoulder in both directions and my even older friends do as well. From what I see on the streets, it's the younger drivers that don't bother looking.
Several points. It wasn't his creation, he created it for those who paid him; they weren't his keys, they belong to others and he was just holding them; attrition is something everyone faces. He is not a godlet, he is not unique, he is not irreplaceable -- regardless of his opinion.
His was a paid position, working for others. Those others are the owners and he is currently depriving them of access to their possession. One justifies that how?
He didn't.
He said "what if" and wanted a hypothetical answer, not 'he should get time because it might', which is what you imply he did.
You say if the market were free software prices would be lower, then mention Linox which is -- free. What you are actually saying is you like MS well enough to use their products (else you wouldn't even be interested in Vista, allowing it to wither and be replaced by less expensive brands), but simply want to force down their prices.
Uh, no. That's the other side of the free market coin. I get to decide the price I want to charge. If I overcharge, I lose.
When your original point is shown to be moot, simply get pedantic, repeat the point and add another ad hominem. Nice repartee.
Context. It's called context. When you're talking thousands of years ago, it gives context to the term.
I've worked at the PO. Mail travels through too friggin' fast for anything to be opened, read and closed. Also, the volume is prohibitive. The mere fact that you get your mail within a couple of days is proof it ain't happening.
Conspiracy theorists, however, tend to require proof of tracking of every piece of mail for all eternity in order to discount the conspiracy.
You contradict yourself. The IP would retard those disciplines, yet valuable ideas (in those same disciplines) are kept secret through guilds and lineages.
Sounds like IP is a much shorter version of guilds and lineages.
Benjamin Franklin died seven days after the Patent Act was passed on April 10, 1790.
Your point?
Ben Franklin died seven days after the Patent Act, April 17, 1790. Your point?