The founding fathers were enlightened enough to know that any power given to the government will be misused, resulting in inefficiencies at best and tyranny at worst.
They surely did not think such a thing. In fact, this statement is so hyperbolic that it is simply laughable.
The fact that since we have bigger governments humanity has advanced immensely more rapidly (in terms of technological and scientific advances, the well-being of the populace, and what not) is apparently lost on you, I guess... Let me hear you talk about how you'd have preferred to spend your childhood in the times when Dickens was alive.
The F-22, aside from the F-111B is the only fighter on the planet that offers the range necessary to enable our long-term ally to defend herself.
Of course. The reason why Australia is under constant attack nowadays and has been for the last decaded, from all sort of evil countries from all over the world, is precisely that they do not have F-22s.
In what way is air dominance absolutely mandatory? A huge part of the rest of the world, from the looks of it, is quite able to live their lives quite well without it...
Your argument is not very different from the one used to decide that the theory of evolution must be wrong because Genesis does not mention any of it.
The fact that you do not seem to consider even the possibility that the guys who wrote that text, in a completely different age, with completely different problems, while holding firmly to ideas that appeared to them self-evident and to which we can now react with little less than disgust and historical perspective---I say, the fact that you do not consider that they were probably not omniscient and perfect while writing that, is simply scary.
Maybe the problem there is that the problem there is *not* a military problem, but a political one---like pretty much everyone was telling the US before *both* invasions...
I am sorry, but the content of what you wrote, specifically
Which is off course much worse than selling software other people wrote for free and competing with companies that pay their programmers.
is either simply trollish or shows your complete misunderstanding of what F/OSS is and what F/OSS developers fo, independently of what you believe the story to be. The standard "slashdot is nothing but F/OSS groupthink blah blah balh" line does in no way change that.
If you cannot find huge, significant nuances in the "slashdot crowd" and its ideology, that only tells something about you.
So these developers that developed the software for free were somehow coerced into doing it, or did they do it fully willfully and while being aware of the possobility of their work being sold later? Maybe those developers even included a licence with their code that explicitely allows others to do precisely what GroundWork is doing... who knows.
In what way does it come from the phrase 'association football'?!
Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work
on
Fedora 10 Released
·
· Score: 1
There is very, very little that can change the behavior of yum on older hardware. Since it uses quite a bit of memory, your problems with that may be due to broken memory. Run memtest for a while.
You cannot check results obtained using Maple in no other way other than rewriting your code in, say, Fortran and doing the computation there. Yo have no access to Maple code, so you have no possible way to verify there isn't an "if user == "invisiblerhino" then flip a coin and add 0.00001 to the final result" somewhere in there.
The whole idea of doing science on top of closed source applications is an oxymoron. Sure they are convenient, but by definition science is not what you do with them.
Why does "service" have to mean "fixing stupid design" and "fixing idiotic bugs"?
The only sofware which can reach perfection, not with respect to bugs with with respect to fulfilling its intended purpose perfectly and permanently, is the one whose purpose does not change, ever. There are *very* few apps which fit that requirement: not even good ol' ls.
What you are discovering is that foundational, generic, software is, eventually, without monetary value.
The thing is, except for very rare cases, if you think too much faster than you can write, then what you are thinking tends not to be of higher quality that your spelling.
Please do not be thick, for it brings nothing to the discussion---your sarcasm is really quite primitive, so it does not itself add anything either. You surely read the "it throws a sudo" I was responding to...
In any case, there is lots and lots of harm to be done by an executable with the user's privilege. For example: all of her information can be accessed at will; you can run all kinds of software,open all kind of non-priviledged ports and what not. Sure, you cannot take ownership of the whole machine, just the user. But there is lots and lots of evil to be done with that only.
In the name of $SOMETHING, what possible good is a pretty good design wrapped up in a bad implementation? Your apology is probably the worst apology EVER!
Slashdot Mirror
The US does not subsidize the defense of Argentina, and we're quite at ease down here, apart from the uneasiness we ourselves provoke.
The founding fathers were enlightened enough to know that any power given to the government will be misused, resulting in inefficiencies at best and tyranny at worst.
They surely did not think such a thing. In fact, this statement is so hyperbolic that it is simply laughable.
The fact that since we have bigger governments humanity has advanced immensely more rapidly (in terms of technological and scientific advances, the well-being of the populace, and what not) is apparently lost on you, I guess... Let me hear you talk about how you'd have preferred to spend your childhood in the times when Dickens was alive.
What part of that would cater for cleaning up the dead bodies from the street?
The F-22, aside from the F-111B is the only fighter on the planet that offers the range necessary to enable our long-term ally to defend herself.
Of course. The reason why Australia is under constant attack nowadays and has been for the last decaded, from all sort of evil countries from all over the world, is precisely that they do not have F-22s.
Your grasp on reality is quite weak...
In what way is air dominance absolutely mandatory? A huge part of the rest of the world, from the looks of it, is quite able to live their lives quite well without it...
Your argument is not very different from the one used to decide that the theory of evolution must be wrong because Genesis does not mention any of it.
The fact that you do not seem to consider even the possibility that the guys who wrote that text, in a completely different age, with completely different problems, while holding firmly to ideas that appeared to them self-evident and to which we can now react with little less than disgust and historical perspective---I say, the fact that you do not consider that they were probably not omniscient and perfect while writing that, is simply scary.
Maybe the problem there is that the problem there is *not* a military problem, but a political one---like pretty much everyone was telling the US before *both* invasions...
I am sorry, but the content of what you wrote, specifically
Which is off course much worse than selling software other people wrote for free and competing with companies that pay their programmers.
is either simply trollish or shows your complete misunderstanding of what F/OSS is and what F/OSS developers fo, independently of what you believe the story to be. The standard "slashdot is nothing but F/OSS groupthink blah blah balh" line does in no way change that.
If you cannot find huge, significant nuances in the "slashdot crowd" and its ideology, that only tells something about you.
So these developers that developed the software for free were somehow coerced into doing it, or did they do it fully willfully and while being aware of the possobility of their work being sold later? Maybe those developers even included a licence with their code that explicitely allows others to do precisely what GroundWork is doing... who knows.
In what way does it come from the phrase 'association football'?!
There is very, very little that can change the behavior of yum on older hardware. Since it uses quite a bit of memory, your problems with that may be due to broken memory. Run memtest for a while.
You can change the compiler and the target architecture, though.
Well, MS (and others, of course) has amply shown that you can do that also if your application is not OSS. What was your point, exactly?
If that many people want the constumization, then it is not a costumization but a missing feature.
You cannot check results obtained using Maple in no other way other than rewriting your code in, say, Fortran and doing the computation there. Yo have no access to Maple code, so you have no possible way to verify there isn't an "if user == "invisiblerhino" then flip a coin and add 0.00001 to the final result" somewhere in there.
The whole idea of doing science on top of closed source applications is an oxymoron. Sure they are convenient, but by definition science is not what you do with them.
In what way is Firefox bloated? Does it do anything else apart from being a browser? Honest question.
Why does "service" have to mean "fixing stupid design" and "fixing idiotic bugs"?
The only sofware which can reach perfection, not with respect to bugs with with respect to fulfilling its intended purpose perfectly and permanently, is the one whose purpose does not change, ever. There are *very* few apps which fit that requirement: not even good ol' ls .
What you are discovering is that foundational, generic, software is, eventually, without monetary value.
Judging by your material, you shoud should probably shoot for +3 funny at the most... +5 funny is waaay out of your reach just yet.
The thing is, except for very rare cases, if you think too much faster than you can write, then what you are thinking tends not to be of higher quality that your spelling.
It most certainly did not "throw a sudo"...
No I did not mean that, I used the wrong mark-up and a line break got lost.
Please do not be thick, for it brings nothing to the discussion---your sarcasm is really quite primitive, so it does not itself add anything either. You surely read the "it throws a sudo" I was responding to...
In any case, there is lots and lots of harm to be done by an executable with the user's privilege. For example: all of her information can be accessed at will; you can run all kinds of software,open all kind of non-priviledged ports and what not. Sure, you cannot take ownership of the whole machine, just the user. But there is lots and lots of evil to be done with that only.
Saying:
touch empty-file chmod +x empty-file
asks for a password?!
In the name of $SOMETHING, what possible good is a pretty good design wrapped up in a bad implementation? Your apology is probably the worst apology EVER!