Yep, and the submitter's remark, "Notwithstanding the First Amendment's free speech guarantees," is silly because the First Amendment doesn't guarantee 100% free speech in all situations. It protects you from the government censoring your opinion, but when your speech begins to infringe on the rights of others (harassment, libel, revealing of trade secrets, etc.), it's not covered under the First Amendment. People have misinterpreted it over the years to mean you can say whatever the hell you want at all times.
Remember what happened when Netscape 4.7 decided to do a complete rewrite instead of incremental improvements over a longer period of time? Netscape went from 90% market share to 1%. A complete rewrite would be just as damaging to Linux.
Why would that magically happen to Linux just because Netscape died? Netscape didn't lose its marketshare because of a rewrite. The rewrite happened after it had already lost to IE. And besides that, it didn't go from "90% market share to 1%." You're totally pulling numbers out of the blue.
If Linux was rewritten, released, and nobody had any problems and all their software still ran, it would continue on. Microsoft successfully replaced the 9x line with NT, after all, and their 90% didn't magically go to 1%.
They didn't "migrate to a regular kernel." XNU, which is based on Mach, is still a microkernel. They just use a FreeBSD subsystem for networking, the filesystem, and so forth.
It used to be Linux was divided into production and development kernels. In the old process, new features would be adopted in 2.7, and stability and bug-fixing done to 2.6. When 2.7 stabilized, it would become 2.8, and a new 2.9 would be started, repeating the cycle.
Linus decided to merge both processes into the 2.6 line, so now all new development goes right into the production line. I guess he's too busy publicly calling BSD/Mach guys "idiots" to realize his mistake.
The nudity in Oblivion looks like barbie dolls too. The nipples are hardly erotic at all. But more importantly, they're never, ever visible at all until a user specifically uses a mod to view them.
I'm furious at the ESRB for punishing a game company for doing absolutely nothing wrong.
Yes, it's interesting isn't it? More interesting is that The Sims 2 has nude bodies in it, they're just pixellated, and you can turn it off with a third-party mod...which is the exact same reason Oblivion is now being marked "M."
The ESRB is officially punishing game companies for what users do to the game. "Hot Coffee" was never normally accessible in GTA; therefore, they can't be rated for it because a user has to specifically unlock it themselves. The same with this, and it's even more silly because the only reason the nude textures are included is because Bethesda needs a nude body texture to display clothes on top of. It was just for their clothing system, for crying out loud, not some malicious erotic intent. I guess if there weren't any nipples, the ESRB wouldn't care?
Can you explain the difference between downloading a mod that unlocks normally inaccessible content, and a mod that includes its own?
Either way, YOU HAVE TO GO OUT AND DOWNLOAD THE MOD YOURSELF WITH THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF DISPLAYING THE CONTENT, AND THEREFORE THAT'S OUT OF BETHESDA'S HANDS, YOU ESRB IDIOTS.
Ahem, sorry. I just don't get how you can rate a game based on a mod. I don't care if the "Hot Coffee" content was in the GTA data files. You couldn't ever access it without downloading a THIRD-PARTY unlocker. This is no different if the third-party mod had the content itself, and there's no way you can rate a game based on the mods that players create. In all cases, the user is going out and displaying this content through a third-party means, content that would normally never appear in game at all.
Fuck the ESRB. Fuck them in their pixelated, unlocked assholes.
Not at all. Vista was already delayed after much promising from Microsoft that it was "on track" for this Fall, and the media chewed them out for it. No matter when Vista gets released, it has the stigma of years of delays all over it.
Funny, on all those points, Apple's hardware truly beats the ugly towers from Dell. Windows and its crumbling security and overly complicated interface, along with the hassle of maintenance, is proof that the vertical solution is superior to the horizontal solution of PCs.
Exactly. Reading that Apple has to "share with the RIAA" just illustrates how chaotically ignorant people have gotten on Slashdot about the RIAA. The RIAA is just a lobby group for major record companies.
I'm so tired of seeing these kinds of tired, emotive phrases uttered. There's nothing greedy about being a corporation or American, or wanting to have variable pricing.
I'm opposing to variable pricing for downloads, but I'm not going to fly the standard anti-capitalist flag over it.
And the media hates it. They HATE that the majority of people in this country have chosen to believe in Christianity. They can't stand that people believe in something they don't. All these tolerant liberals aren't tolerant at all, so they do what they can to piss Christians off. Just look at the reaction the liberal media gave to some guy daring to, *gasp*, make a movie about Jesus. A bunch of vitriol spewed his way, he's making money off Jesus! He's "obsessed with violence!" But all the other sex and violence from Hollywood is a-okay.
If a successful book that was majorly sacrilegious to Islam came out, the media would ignore it or, worse, bury it. Because it would surely be the work of "intolerant bigots" or "conservatives."
I was just curious what his reaction would be. Or what if I distributed his speeches for free so nobody would have to pay and attend. Given all the insane contradictions in the very ideas behind the GPL, I can't help wondering his reactions to various situations.
Or at least, that's what the rest of the industry keeps trying to tell MS. So if it's Apple doing it, it's okay?
1.) Apple isn't a monopoly. 2.) It's not like there's a commercial market for torrent clients or anything that will be threatened. Bittorrent is an open protocol. 3.) What the industry is telling Microsoft is that they can't leverage their monopoly to damage free choice. For instance, making IE default to MSN Search on all new installations, even though MSN Search only has 11% of the market and Google is #1. 4.) This won't be allowed to be used for illegal piracy anyway.
Don't care about XBox 360, sorry. It's nothing more than Microsoft's attempt to spread Windows to the living room. The more game developers depend on DirectX and other Windows-only technologies, the more tied they are to that platform, ensuring Microsoft's survival. Given the thread they're hanging on lately, they're desperate for any help they can get. Why give them free publicity?
Even the PS3 is using OpenGL and other open standards. Go ahead, call me a zealot. I recognize a monopoly push for what it is. Microsoft does not belong in the console market making gaming machines. They make operating systems and office software. Just about everything else loses them money.
I'm hoping this torrent technology is used for downloading podcasts. Currently, the Apple Store does not host the podcasts it's listing but links to their direct download links instead, which can kill their servers.
Google seems to have been oddly quiet on that front for the many years prior to IE7 that Firefox has made this feature available.
1.) Firefox isn't a monopoly. 2.) Google said, right in the article, that they'd support this initial setup question being asked by Firefox as well as IE7.
The bigger question would be, what if I copied RMS' autograph and started selling it myself at a cheaper price, or even just giving it away? Would he want to be the only one able to sell RMS autographs?
Why are we hearing so much about this freaking novel? Is it the greatest novel written in the past 20 years or something? It feels like every week, I'm hearing something about "the Da Vinci Code," whether it's about the movie, or the book, or someone studying the history behind it, or saying it's real, or it's fake, or blah blah blah.
I'm just tired of seeing the phrase "Da Vinci Code." It's like the media is obsessed with advertising this book for the author--perhaps because of the premise involving Jesus having a wife and kid, which pisses Christians off, and anything pissing off a group of people who belief a certain faith is a-okay in this country as long as it's Christianity.
What sense of humor? He really is charging for photos and autographs because he considers it a use of his time. It's not an ironic joke, according to him.
Oh, god, a "true liberal" would mean a super-huge nanny government with its hand in everything, raising taxes enough to create a socialist environment. It would not work. It would collapse.
Governments mismanage everything--it's the decision-by-committee problem. They are not as efficient as a free market enterprise. My city's roads suck ass, and every year, our government is repaving them, and they keep cracking and needing to be repaved. If a private company paved our roads, I guarantee they'd be smoother and last longer, or we'd switch companies. With the government, you don't have a choice.
Same with our schools.
And by the way, why are you portraying the War on Drugs as a conservative issue? Last I checked, Democrats were against drugs too and always have been. They even voted to go to war in Iraq. I love this kind of selective memory Democrats have where they ignore their own party's current and past positions on issues just to bash Republicans some more.
Which administration proposed the DMCA again? Oh, yeah, you Democrats.
War against our freedom? I guess you've already forgotten all the crazy shenanigans of the Clinton era. It's not surprising, given that the media tries to portray the man in the most glowing light possible. Polls taken indicate over 80% of journalists report themselves as "Democrat." Not surprising.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, and the submitter's remark, "Notwithstanding the First Amendment's free speech guarantees," is silly because the First Amendment doesn't guarantee 100% free speech in all situations. It protects you from the government censoring your opinion, but when your speech begins to infringe on the rights of others (harassment, libel, revealing of trade secrets, etc.), it's not covered under the First Amendment. People have misinterpreted it over the years to mean you can say whatever the hell you want at all times.
Remember what happened when Netscape 4.7 decided to do a complete rewrite instead of incremental improvements over a longer period of time? Netscape went from 90% market share to 1%. A complete rewrite would be just as damaging to Linux.
Why would that magically happen to Linux just because Netscape died? Netscape didn't lose its marketshare because of a rewrite. The rewrite happened after it had already lost to IE. And besides that, it didn't go from "90% market share to 1%." You're totally pulling numbers out of the blue.
If Linux was rewritten, released, and nobody had any problems and all their software still ran, it would continue on. Microsoft successfully replaced the 9x line with NT, after all, and their 90% didn't magically go to 1%.
They didn't "migrate to a regular kernel." XNU, which is based on Mach, is still a microkernel. They just use a FreeBSD subsystem for networking, the filesystem, and so forth.
Strange. I'm running BETA-version of Ubuntu on this machine, and I have yet to see it crash.
Well then, clearly, your experience cancels his out, and we can ignore him. Thanks!
It used to be Linux was divided into production and development kernels. In the old process, new features would be adopted in 2.7, and stability and bug-fixing done to 2.6. When 2.7 stabilized, it would become 2.8, and a new 2.9 would be started, repeating the cycle.
Linus decided to merge both processes into the 2.6 line, so now all new development goes right into the production line. I guess he's too busy publicly calling BSD/Mach guys "idiots" to realize his mistake.
The nudity in Oblivion looks like barbie dolls too. The nipples are hardly erotic at all. But more importantly, they're never, ever visible at all until a user specifically uses a mod to view them.
I'm furious at the ESRB for punishing a game company for doing absolutely nothing wrong.
Yes, it's interesting isn't it? More interesting is that The Sims 2 has nude bodies in it, they're just pixellated, and you can turn it off with a third-party mod...which is the exact same reason Oblivion is now being marked "M."
The ESRB is officially punishing game companies for what users do to the game. "Hot Coffee" was never normally accessible in GTA; therefore, they can't be rated for it because a user has to specifically unlock it themselves. The same with this, and it's even more silly because the only reason the nude textures are included is because Bethesda needs a nude body texture to display clothes on top of. It was just for their clothing system, for crying out loud, not some malicious erotic intent. I guess if there weren't any nipples, the ESRB wouldn't care?
Fucking idiots.
Can you explain the difference between downloading a mod that unlocks normally inaccessible content, and a mod that includes its own?
Either way, YOU HAVE TO GO OUT AND DOWNLOAD THE MOD YOURSELF WITH THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF DISPLAYING THE CONTENT, AND THEREFORE THAT'S OUT OF BETHESDA'S HANDS, YOU ESRB IDIOTS.
Ahem, sorry. I just don't get how you can rate a game based on a mod. I don't care if the "Hot Coffee" content was in the GTA data files. You couldn't ever access it without downloading a THIRD-PARTY unlocker. This is no different if the third-party mod had the content itself, and there's no way you can rate a game based on the mods that players create. In all cases, the user is going out and displaying this content through a third-party means, content that would normally never appear in game at all.
Fuck the ESRB. Fuck them in their pixelated, unlocked assholes.
Not at all. Vista was already delayed after much promising from Microsoft that it was "on track" for this Fall, and the media chewed them out for it. No matter when Vista gets released, it has the stigma of years of delays all over it.
Funny, on all those points, Apple's hardware truly beats the ugly towers from Dell. Windows and its crumbling security and overly complicated interface, along with the hassle of maintenance, is proof that the vertical solution is superior to the horizontal solution of PCs.
OK, first of all, this is Gartner, not MS making the claims
Yes, but it's based on the current state of the beta builds as well as other analyst commentary.
Yes, this is the same Gartner that said that Linux was too complex to have been written by Linus Torvalds...
And that's true, Linus hasn't written all of Linux. A worldwide community of hackers has.
There are? Really? Really? In all honesty, I don't think that I've ever heard any non-OSS zealots complain about Windows XP
Try working tech support sometime, even just inside your company. I don't know anyone who likes Windows, and these are normal, non-computer people.
Exactly. Reading that Apple has to "share with the RIAA" just illustrates how chaotically ignorant people have gotten on Slashdot about the RIAA. The RIAA is just a lobby group for major record companies.
greedy corporate america
I'm so tired of seeing these kinds of tired, emotive phrases uttered. There's nothing greedy about being a corporation or American, or wanting to have variable pricing.
I'm opposing to variable pricing for downloads, but I'm not going to fly the standard anti-capitalist flag over it.
And the media hates it. They HATE that the majority of people in this country have chosen to believe in Christianity. They can't stand that people believe in something they don't. All these tolerant liberals aren't tolerant at all, so they do what they can to piss Christians off. Just look at the reaction the liberal media gave to some guy daring to, *gasp*, make a movie about Jesus. A bunch of vitriol spewed his way, he's making money off Jesus! He's "obsessed with violence!" But all the other sex and violence from Hollywood is a-okay.
If a successful book that was majorly sacrilegious to Islam came out, the media would ignore it or, worse, bury it. Because it would surely be the work of "intolerant bigots" or "conservatives."
I was just curious what his reaction would be. Or what if I distributed his speeches for free so nobody would have to pay and attend. Given all the insane contradictions in the very ideas behind the GPL, I can't help wondering his reactions to various situations.
Or at least, that's what the rest of the industry keeps trying to tell MS. So if it's Apple doing it, it's okay?
1.) Apple isn't a monopoly.
2.) It's not like there's a commercial market for torrent clients or anything that will be threatened. Bittorrent is an open protocol.
3.) What the industry is telling Microsoft is that they can't leverage their monopoly to damage free choice. For instance, making IE default to MSN Search on all new installations, even though MSN Search only has 11% of the market and Google is #1.
4.) This won't be allowed to be used for illegal piracy anyway.
Don't care about XBox 360, sorry. It's nothing more than Microsoft's attempt to spread Windows to the living room. The more game developers depend on DirectX and other Windows-only technologies, the more tied they are to that platform, ensuring Microsoft's survival. Given the thread they're hanging on lately, they're desperate for any help they can get. Why give them free publicity?
Even the PS3 is using OpenGL and other open standards. Go ahead, call me a zealot. I recognize a monopoly push for what it is. Microsoft does not belong in the console market making gaming machines. They make operating systems and office software. Just about everything else loses them money.
I'm hoping this torrent technology is used for downloading podcasts. Currently, the Apple Store does not host the podcasts it's listing but links to their direct download links instead, which can kill their servers.
Google seems to have been oddly quiet on that front for the many years prior to IE7 that Firefox has made this feature available.
1.) Firefox isn't a monopoly.
2.) Google said, right in the article, that they'd support this initial setup question being asked by Firefox as well as IE7.
There's nothing "oddly quiet" about it.
The bigger question would be, what if I copied RMS' autograph and started selling it myself at a cheaper price, or even just giving it away? Would he want to be the only one able to sell RMS autographs?
Why are we hearing so much about this freaking novel? Is it the greatest novel written in the past 20 years or something? It feels like every week, I'm hearing something about "the Da Vinci Code," whether it's about the movie, or the book, or someone studying the history behind it, or saying it's real, or it's fake, or blah blah blah.
I'm just tired of seeing the phrase "Da Vinci Code." It's like the media is obsessed with advertising this book for the author--perhaps because of the premise involving Jesus having a wife and kid, which pisses Christians off, and anything pissing off a group of people who belief a certain faith is a-okay in this country as long as it's Christianity.
What sense of humor? He really is charging for photos and autographs because he considers it a use of his time. It's not an ironic joke, according to him.
Oh, god, a "true liberal" would mean a super-huge nanny government with its hand in everything, raising taxes enough to create a socialist environment. It would not work. It would collapse.
Governments mismanage everything--it's the decision-by-committee problem. They are not as efficient as a free market enterprise. My city's roads suck ass, and every year, our government is repaving them, and they keep cracking and needing to be repaved. If a private company paved our roads, I guarantee they'd be smoother and last longer, or we'd switch companies. With the government, you don't have a choice.
Same with our schools.
And by the way, why are you portraying the War on Drugs as a conservative issue? Last I checked, Democrats were against drugs too and always have been. They even voted to go to war in Iraq. I love this kind of selective memory Democrats have where they ignore their own party's current and past positions on issues just to bash Republicans some more.
Which administration proposed the DMCA again? Oh, yeah, you Democrats.
War against our freedom? I guess you've already forgotten all the crazy shenanigans of the Clinton era. It's not surprising, given that the media tries to portray the man in the most glowing light possible. Polls taken indicate over 80% of journalists report themselves as "Democrat." Not surprising.