But by promoting open sourced software from the get-go, any other types of software are at a huge disadvantage. What my statement intended to imply is that the government should give all other options a fair shake first, not showing favoritism one option before you've looked at them all. Any sort of promotion thereafter would be an adverse effect. The government choosing what works best for them doesn't mean that the particular company they chose is the best one out of them all, it just means that they had the proper solution.
And, if what you say is true about the government caving in to commercial interests (in my opinion, politicians cave in to their own interests to keep their positions, whether they be commercial or not), what makes you think that open source software has a fighting chance anyways? It would already be dead in the water and the potential U.N. promotion would all be for show anyways. These politicians all of the sudden become "good" in your opinion, would they?
Wow, you really are trying to twist a statement into something extreme aren't you? It should be apparent that what I wrote wasn't intended for every single thing under the sun. I really wish that people would see things as they are obviously meant rather than being miserable pricks and contorting what people say.
If you ask me, AIDS education is far more important. They should learn that sleeping with virgins won't cure the disease (and please, don't try to imply that message is intended for all people, but there are some who really do believe it). More often than not, people just don't care and continue to sleep with others despite the fact that they have HIV or AIDS, otherwise how would it spread? The only other possibility would be because they didn't know. If they were educated, they'd use contraceptives and regularly test themselves. Educating them should be top priorty. And yes, let's make the education process privately funded, as well as testing and treatment. I don't want to hear any bitching about how that would be terrible. I'd allow a private institution funding it before a government anyday. I want to help a cause out of the goodness of my heart, not because of a league of nations or bureaucracy taxing me to do so.
Last but not least, if you're trying to equate capitalism to the AIDS epidemic, fuck off, you ignorant son of a bitch. In fact, you should be fucking off already.
Glad that you agree, WTFmonkey. Yet another case of different interpretations. I'm so used to my libertarian beliefs being attacked by leftists that I figured that was the perspective it was coming from. You'll find that I'm very analytical.
So, I take it that you're trying to imply that "man" is capitalistic software companies, and the sage is open source movement, correct? So Linus would thus "accomplish without taking credit" but the term Linux comes from his own first name? If that was the case, why wouldn't every open source project leader go without a name and just give? They have no desire for ostentation but yet they try to tell anybody who's willing to listen about how great their cause is and how it's the best choice?
And how do all capitalistic software makers take from the poor and give to the rich when they have to produce a product to stay alive and people buy it? They had an alternative, right? But they still chose to buy their product.
Your attempt in trying to apply this passage to the subject at hand seems overly broad and wrong. Enough of the socialistic preaching, please.
By the way, nature is a capitalist. Evolution is a survival of the fittest.
Did I imply that it is evil? It isn't and I never said it was. You probably should be agreeing with me yet you're saying that my logic is flawed and rather silly? Interesting.
The government really needs to stay out of promoting things one way or the other. Let things handle themselves. The U.N. shouldn't be forcing people to be aware of open source nor should they be trying to write mechanisms supporting it, they should be trying to solve real problems at hand (albeit I don't like a massive government body like the U.N.).
Like it or not, open source software isn't always the best choice. Why not try using the best software for the job, open sourced or not? Purchasing software isn't evil.
With that said, please refrain with "but Microsoft does evil things" posts. Millions make money from software, not just Microsoft.
While the GameCube sales figure are much better, it seems to me like they could still be losing money on it. They lost a lot of third party support and can only churn out so many first party titles at a given time. If they still are losing money on each console sale, which would seem to be true, I'm not sure if they have enough titles to get into positive cash flow. Anybody with stats that say otherwise? Is the GBA enough to keep it afloat?
Nah, I wasn't reading into them too much, moreso trying to prevent more leftist propaganda on Slashdot. It's hard to differentiate a joke and their bullshit nowadays. I don't browse the boards looking to hit up the lefties, but when I see something looking like a jab, I'll at least try to make them hold up their convictions. It's a newer trend, but rather fun.
To quote the movie Network: "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"
Well, if that make you feel good, there's no problem, but why blame capitalism? I don't think someone that uses a formula in order to maximize financial gain is truly an artist if you ask me. They're a businessperson.
To blame capitalism for someone's choices is like blaming the extended family of someone because they ended up ugly and with an extra toe.
Wait, you won't argue what I had to say, just mod it down? Don't just pass me off, if you're opinions are worth anything show some backbone and prove me wrong rather than act like a prick with your modpoints.
It's a hard one to translate, but I can pull out of it some leftist anger out of it with the "Windows and money" part. It might be about their buying choices.
In short, a pissed off Stallmanite having to turn a software project into an anti-capitalist, self recognition crusade.
"Gee whiz, guys. Look at me! I'm taking a stand for a cause."
And capitalism doesn't do that for you? People buying things fund creativity, intelligence, wit, and determination.
The other option is doing things, albeit out of the goodness of your heart or for the betterment of humanity, without a chance of having a better financial/materialistic life for it. It's hard to be motivated with just a "thanks" or "oh, that's neat" when you're living just like everybody else, more than likely poor.
Let's not bash capitalism, folks. You do it enough, and it does you no good. Besides, what's so bad?
Keep software and politics separate, asshole. We don't need them even more integrated. I don't care if you're a GPL advocate or not, he's just jerking the geeks off hoping to get a few votes.
Quiet, human! The Dark Lord shall make thou wear thick plastic-rimmed glasses while sitting in front of a pink iMac with a full suite of Macromedia products while sipping on a Starbucks latte. You shall paint for me! You all shall paint for me!
Well, earlier today, we heard that free markets cause all kinds of terrible things in the tech industry, now we hear that it will cut the power. What's it going to do next, knock up my girlfriend and making the world spin backwards?
It doesn't hurt my feelings too much when a game company doesn't release code to a discontinued or unreleased game. That code still might have value and could be used in a forthcoming title by the company. If they can release code, great. If not, I wouldn't look down upon the company because of it.
Some kids can handle more adult-themed games (and other media for that matter), some cannot. Neglect is often a factor in a child's problems, but people should be careful in automatically assuming that all youth cannot handle games like Grand Theft Auto 3. From what I've seen, most M rated games are equivalent to a PG-13 rated movie, the M rating mostly being because of blood and gore.
I don't believe that parents should put too much weight into the ESRB ratings, they're alright for determining what realms the subject matter fall under, but not the severity. Try looking at the back cover of the game and reading what it's about and ask a store clerk if you're unsure about something. Rent the game first and watch it play out for a bit and play it first yourself if you can. Most importantly, explain what's real and not real and why you cannot do certain things in society. If you teach them right from wrong, you won't need to shelter them as much.
Slashdot Mirror
But by promoting open sourced software from the get-go, any other types of software are at a huge disadvantage. What my statement intended to imply is that the government should give all other options a fair shake first, not showing favoritism one option before you've looked at them all. Any sort of promotion thereafter would be an adverse effect. The government choosing what works best for them doesn't mean that the particular company they chose is the best one out of them all, it just means that they had the proper solution.
And, if what you say is true about the government caving in to commercial interests (in my opinion, politicians cave in to their own interests to keep their positions, whether they be commercial or not), what makes you think that open source software has a fighting chance anyways? It would already be dead in the water and the potential U.N. promotion would all be for show anyways. These politicians all of the sudden become "good" in your opinion, would they?
Wow, you really are trying to twist a statement into something extreme aren't you? It should be apparent that what I wrote wasn't intended for every single thing under the sun. I really wish that people would see things as they are obviously meant rather than being miserable pricks and contorting what people say.
If you ask me, AIDS education is far more important. They should learn that sleeping with virgins won't cure the disease (and please, don't try to imply that message is intended for all people, but there are some who really do believe it). More often than not, people just don't care and continue to sleep with others despite the fact that they have HIV or AIDS, otherwise how would it spread? The only other possibility would be because they didn't know. If they were educated, they'd use contraceptives and regularly test themselves. Educating them should be top priorty. And yes, let's make the education process privately funded, as well as testing and treatment. I don't want to hear any bitching about how that would be terrible. I'd allow a private institution funding it before a government anyday. I want to help a cause out of the goodness of my heart, not because of a league of nations or bureaucracy taxing me to do so.
Last but not least, if you're trying to equate capitalism to the AIDS epidemic, fuck off, you ignorant son of a bitch. In fact, you should be fucking off already.
Glad that you agree, WTFmonkey. Yet another case of different interpretations. I'm so used to my libertarian beliefs being attacked by leftists that I figured that was the perspective it was coming from. You'll find that I'm very analytical.
So, I take it that you're trying to imply that "man" is capitalistic software companies, and the sage is open source movement, correct? So Linus would thus "accomplish without taking credit" but the term Linux comes from his own first name? If that was the case, why wouldn't every open source project leader go without a name and just give? They have no desire for ostentation but yet they try to tell anybody who's willing to listen about how great their cause is and how it's the best choice?
And how do all capitalistic software makers take from the poor and give to the rich when they have to produce a product to stay alive and people buy it? They had an alternative, right? But they still chose to buy their product.
Your attempt in trying to apply this passage to the subject at hand seems overly broad and wrong. Enough of the socialistic preaching, please.
By the way, nature is a capitalist. Evolution is a survival of the fittest.
Did I imply that it is evil? It isn't and I never said it was. You probably should be agreeing with me yet you're saying that my logic is flawed and rather silly? Interesting.
The government really needs to stay out of promoting things one way or the other. Let things handle themselves. The U.N. shouldn't be forcing people to be aware of open source nor should they be trying to write mechanisms supporting it, they should be trying to solve real problems at hand (albeit I don't like a massive government body like the U.N.).
Like it or not, open source software isn't always the best choice. Why not try using the best software for the job, open sourced or not? Purchasing software isn't evil.
With that said, please refrain with "but Microsoft does evil things" posts. Millions make money from software, not just Microsoft.
While the GameCube sales figure are much better, it seems to me like they could still be losing money on it. They lost a lot of third party support and can only churn out so many first party titles at a given time. If they still are losing money on each console sale, which would seem to be true, I'm not sure if they have enough titles to get into positive cash flow. Anybody with stats that say otherwise? Is the GBA enough to keep it afloat?
Nah, I wasn't reading into them too much, moreso trying to prevent more leftist propaganda on Slashdot. It's hard to differentiate a joke and their bullshit nowadays. I don't browse the boards looking to hit up the lefties, but when I see something looking like a jab, I'll at least try to make them hold up their convictions. It's a newer trend, but rather fun.
To quote the movie Network: "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"
Well, if that make you feel good, there's no problem, but why blame capitalism? I don't think someone that uses a formula in order to maximize financial gain is truly an artist if you ask me. They're a businessperson.
To blame capitalism for someone's choices is like blaming the extended family of someone because they ended up ugly and with an extra toe.
Wait, you won't argue what I had to say, just mod it down? Don't just pass me off, if you're opinions are worth anything show some backbone and prove me wrong rather than act like a prick with your modpoints.
It's a hard one to translate, but I can pull out of it some leftist anger out of it with the "Windows and money" part. It might be about their buying choices.
In short, a pissed off Stallmanite having to turn a software project into an anti-capitalist, self recognition crusade.
"Gee whiz, guys. Look at me! I'm taking a stand for a cause."
And capitalism doesn't do that for you? People buying things fund creativity, intelligence, wit, and determination.
The other option is doing things, albeit out of the goodness of your heart or for the betterment of humanity, without a chance of having a better financial/materialistic life for it. It's hard to be motivated with just a "thanks" or "oh, that's neat" when you're living just like everybody else, more than likely poor.
Let's not bash capitalism, folks. You do it enough, and it does you no good. Besides, what's so bad?
Keep software and politics separate, asshole. We don't need them even more integrated. I don't care if you're a GPL advocate or not, he's just jerking the geeks off hoping to get a few votes.
Remember, he's a politician.
Quiet, human! The Dark Lord shall make thou wear thick plastic-rimmed glasses while sitting in front of a pink iMac with a full suite of Macromedia products while sipping on a Starbucks latte. You shall paint for me! You all shall paint for me!
Why bother? It's apparent my audience has no brains.
No shit my budding Sherlock Holmses. This is a joke. The fucktard who downmodded me should realize this as well.
So, all those things in the book are great and all, but what about Flash? You can do no wrong with flash, you know.
Well, earlier today, we heard that free markets cause all kinds of terrible things in the tech industry, now we hear that it will cut the power. What's it going to do next, knock up my girlfriend and making the world spin backwards?
No, no. No bias at all. Right?
I have an iRiver SlimX 350, is there any word on whether or not that or any other model for that matter will have firmware upgrades to support ogg?
Speaking of which, they really need to put their updates in something else than a Windows executable.
Look at this. Comcast wants more money for the higher speed.
Emo labels? That somehow makes me want to... cry. The world just seems so dark now. I might just roll on the floor and grovel.
Teacher: So, how do you guys feel about having your works pirated over the internet?
Student #1: Eh, no big deal.
Teacher: No big deal? But...
Student #2: We don't make shit for royalties. Like it matters.
Teacher: Language! But it's being stolen!
Student #3: It's not stealing, it's technically copyright infringement you stupid twat!
Student #4: Hell, it's more like free publicity. Fuckin' A!
Teacher: I said langua...
Student #5: And why the fuck do I have to wear leather pants? They fucking stick to my crotch!
Teacher: Enough of the language!
Student #6: Fuck you and fuck the RIAA for ripping us off!
Student #1: Wait a second, we never signed a contract with this cunt! We don't owe you shit!
Student #5: And you made me wear leather? You sick bitch!
All students: Lynch mob!
At least that's what my class probably would have done back in the day.
It looks like those judge(s) are going to get an angry phone call... or two... or 50 million.
It doesn't hurt my feelings too much when a game company doesn't release code to a discontinued or unreleased game. That code still might have value and could be used in a forthcoming title by the company. If they can release code, great. If not, I wouldn't look down upon the company because of it.
Some kids can handle more adult-themed games (and other media for that matter), some cannot. Neglect is often a factor in a child's problems, but people should be careful in automatically assuming that all youth cannot handle games like Grand Theft Auto 3. From what I've seen, most M rated games are equivalent to a PG-13 rated movie, the M rating mostly being because of blood and gore.
I don't believe that parents should put too much weight into the ESRB ratings, they're alright for determining what realms the subject matter fall under, but not the severity. Try looking at the back cover of the game and reading what it's about and ask a store clerk if you're unsure about something. Rent the game first and watch it play out for a bit and play it first yourself if you can. Most importantly, explain what's real and not real and why you cannot do certain things in society. If you teach them right from wrong, you won't need to shelter them as much.