Why? If the intention is to differentiate the cars that drive mostly on private property they would have made the installation of GPS optional. Why mandate GPS device on cars that drive on public road? It is a lot less costly (and convinient) to make GPS optional so only those who will claim "private driving" will have to prove it. It is amazingly simple. The reason the GPS and public taxing does not make sense is because it is just an excuse for something else, the real goal of the legislation.
Because it is about collecting $10 for each computer, under the pretense of recycling. If you allow someone else to recycle for profit you will not collect the $10 .
Police arrest people all the time without trial, without strong evidence, and without first sorting things out. What is it so important here? Would they not arrest someone who sells illegal goods, only to find later that his methods of doing business was too lax and did not know what he was selling?
Note, he was not charged with a crime. He was just arrested, like all the million others who are arrested and and charged (or let go) two days later.
Agreed. But the more delivery systems the better, we might one day free the valuable wireless spectum allocated to TV for more important things. When people are able to receive signal through the wire, it becomes more and more practical to cut them off from the airwaves.
Using the very same logic of your post, we are now free to claim that the "free" Wi-fi service that the airline provides is already included in the airplane ticket.
I don't have a problem for the airline being greedy or for the passanger being greedy: it is market forces at work, where everyone tries to get the most out of the deal. "Greedy" and
"profitable" is one and the same, there is little or no distinction between them.
The vast majority of FOSS developers are only agaist patents, the are not against copyrights. Every time a developer adds a GPL license to his work, or displays his name as the author, he says to the world that "this is my work" . It is not yours or ours, this software "belongs to me". And the penalties are severe. Try ripping-out the copyright notices from the source, or perhaps change the name of author with yours. Nobody will like you, nobody. In most cases, the developers are agaist sharing the ownership of their work -- this is protected
through copyright.
This kind of reasonings are strange. So what if your name starts with Mc, and so what if you yourself are an immigrant from India? It is more logical to assume that even the Indian programmer who has recently arrived should be against the Indians who have yet to arrive, who will (in effect) should be seen as future competitors. I have worked with many Indians at here in US. When you talk to the Indians, the conversation always assumes that they themselves are against the next Indians (or anyone else, it does not really matter) who might compete against them. Who needs the competition? It is not desirable by anyone; definetly, not for the sake of mindership.
Lots of posters are quick to quote 'several millions' for the cost developement. Clearly, you are out of touch: my organization is spending 25 million per year just to maintain 200k of code. With this in mind, the total cost of developing and maninting the Linux kernel over that last 13 years should be in the order of several billions (not millions).
Perhaps, but that is not the point. Because according to your logic, a citizen has no right to life either unless you protect yourself against others attacking you. You should wear body armor, buy guns, and train on martial arts; just like using encryption for email.
The main issue is how should citizens behave towards one another by default, and spare us the incovenience of having to protect ourselves from one another.
The "standard of living" is a psychological phenomenon, it is what-you-want vs what-you-can-afford, and your happiness is dependent on this. It means nothing to me if my '93 Nissan is a much better car than the Predident's Trouman. As long as my car is the worst car on lot, but I wish I had a Lexus, then I am still very miserable.
I don't particularly care whether others are using Linux; furthermore, why should I spend my time to persuaded others? I don't care.
As for those who are circulating ill-information to the public, well, there is not much you can do to stop them. The will continue to circulate fud regardless of how much you try to stop them. No much you can do about it, assuming you actually desire to do something about it.
Let's see, you are against denial-attacks through the Internet, but you are for denial-attacks by phone and letters? Weird...
Usualy people are either for or against attacks, and they do make coherenet arguments, at least more that those who are picky about particular kinds of attacks but not other similar attacks.
SCO is already in a miserable position in court where (as expected) they cannot show evidence to support *their* allegations. They are already in a down-spiral. Apparently, the only thing it can distruct everyone from the main issue at hand (avoidance to show evidence) is to spread stories about Denial-attacts. Like Linus said, if anyone has to grow up that is Mr. McBride himself and for ESR (owr clown) who will will not miss the spotlight to promote himself by issuing orders (?) for linuxers to stop the attacks(?) . Once again, it is self-promotion in play, for McBride and ESR. Same movie again, and we have seen it many times before.
I did not know that SCO printed so many pages and handed them to court; for I remeber SCO complaining in court that they could not provide evidence for *their* claims because (seriously) the "evidence" are so many and plentiful they... could not afford to buy ink for the printer. I'm glad they found the money.
That is not the issue. If it was just a contract, all you could do is sue in civil court for damages. But in this case is beyond contracts, it is about actually going to jail because you copied (into a low-quality medium) some parts of the movie. You get to go to jail for, essentially, for stealing peanuts from the movie barons, while McBride and his gang of criminals are free to rob the public without any real change of being arrested through citizen's arrest or ever going to jail. We are talking about applying heavy-handed penalties to common citizens, while ignoring applying similar concepts to common criminals.
I'm afraid, the SCO nonsense will not end. The judge asked SCO to specify the code; no problem, he will receive the whole Linux kernel, and perhaps the BSD and SGI kernel also.:-)
In other news, SCO's later open letter has given me a good idea. I will refuse to abide by the terms of my rent agreement, and if they take me to court i will be to say that my landlord is a communist and thus he does not respect the property rights represented by our national currency. Why should I abide by the contract when his very own beliefs are against it. It fact, my landloard should instead be paying me because this is what the US Constition means when by granting me the "pursuit of happiness". How can anyone be happy without free shelter, or my ability to profit from the property of others? I have to rent other people's property for free, then sub-lease it others for a fee in order to pursuit happiness, as the US Constitution obligates me to.
You are repeating yourself. I am sure you then enjoy the Spam on Slashdot and the garbage at your TV without complain.
No. You are not in a position to tell me what to do. It is up to me, what you desire is irrelevent (and so is your argument, which you faithfully repeating like a parrot what you have been taught, and never had he chance to think how silly it actually is.
I will continue to complain about Slashdot's spam. Thanks a million.
That is standard nonsense, much like "if you don't like what is on TV, why don't you go to the theater." Or, if "if you don't like this station, why don't you switch to another one."
The problem with such comments is that it ignores the fact that Slashdot has become a tabloid magazine. No! I don't want to read such articles, shift through them, or associate with the crowd that has losts its balls to complain!
Complaining is healthy human attribute; at least, it is a lot better than the characteristics of people who have don't have given up in complaining and no longer object to being bombarded to Slashdot's SCO spam.
Do you receive spam through email? Should you then complain about it, orjust close your account in protest and stop using the Internet?
And how about drug-trafficing in your home time. You should complain about that too and do something about it, instead of just moving to another town.
Sorry, this is a legal case which will be decided according to the law. It makes no difference if FSF is for or against copyrights, since regardless of what they believe the whole issue is about the law, not my or your beliefs about copyrights.
SCO started this legal case about copyrights and we have been waiting for almost a year to show us the evidence for *their* lawsuit. If they start twisting their arguments towards my personal beliefs on copyrights then I have to remind them it the law and their evidence that counts. My personal beliefes, or the beliefs of FSF are irrelevent!
The issue before us is not about responding to SCO's allegation or about censoring McBride out of the picture. Our issue is about covering the SCO story every 5 friking minutes between now and March 2005.
I think the issue has become a daily Slashdot spam, which will be repeated later in the day if McBride opens his mouth again, for whatever reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds reputable? Hardly. I am willing to bet
that Florida Institute of Technology is not even acredited.
Why? If the intention is to differentiate
the cars that drive mostly on private property
they would have made the installation of GPS
optional. Why mandate GPS device on cars
that drive on public road? It is a lot less
costly (and convinient) to make GPS optional
so only those who will claim "private driving"
will have to prove it.
It is amazingly simple. The reason the GPS and
public taxing does not make sense is because it
is just an excuse for something else,
the real goal of the legislation.
Because it is about collecting $10 for each
computer, under the pretense of recycling.
If you allow someone else to recycle for profit
you will not collect the $10 .
Police arrest people all the time without trial,
without strong evidence, and without first sorting
things out. What is it so important here? Would
they not arrest someone who sells illegal goods,
only to find later that his methods of doing business
was too lax and did not know what he was
selling?
Note, he was not charged with a crime. He was
just arrested, like all the million others who are arrested
and and charged (or let go) two days later.
Agreed. But the more delivery systems the better,
we might one day free the valuable wireless
spectum allocated to TV for more important things. When
people are able to receive signal through the
wire, it becomes more and more practical to cut them off from the airwaves.
are now free to claim that the "free" Wi-fi
service that the airline provides is already
included in the airplane ticket.
I don't have a problem for the airline being
greedy or for the passanger being greedy: it
is market forces at work, where everyone tries
to get the most out of the deal. "Greedy" and
"profitable" is one and the same, there is little
or no distinction between them.
The vast majority of FOSS developers are only
agaist patents, the are not against copyrights.
Every time a developer adds a GPL license to
his work, or displays his name as the author,
he says to the world that "this is my work" . It
is not yours or ours, this software "belongs to me".
And the penalties are severe. Try ripping-out the
copyright notices from the source, or perhaps
change the name of author with yours. Nobody
will like you, nobody. In most cases, the developers are agaist sharing
the ownership of their work -- this is protected
through copyright.
This kind of reasonings are strange. So what if
your name starts with Mc, and so what if you
yourself are an immigrant from India? It is more
logical to assume that even the Indian programmer
who has recently arrived should be against
the Indians who have yet to arrive, who will
(in effect) should be seen as future competitors.
I have worked with many Indians at here in US.
When you talk to the Indians, the conversation
always assumes that they themselves are against the next
Indians (or anyone else, it does not really matter) who
might compete against them. Who needs the competition?
It is not desirable by anyone; definetly, not
for the sake of mindership.
Lots of posters are quick to quote 'several millions'
for the cost developement. Clearly, you are
out of touch: my organization is spending 25 million
per year just to maintain 200k of code. With this
in mind, the total cost of developing and maninting
the Linux kernel over that last 13 years should
be in the order of several billions (not millions).
according to your logic, a citizen has no
right to life either unless you protect yourself
against others attacking you. You should wear
body armor, buy guns, and train on martial arts;
just like using encryption for email.
The main issue is how should citizens behave
towards one another by default, and spare us
the incovenience of having to protect ourselves
from one another.
This is Microsoft's proxy at work. It is simple, SCO will
loby God whenever Microsoft says so.
provide proof because as you all know they don't have any!
They will need to get it from IBM... Yep, sure.
The "standard of living" is a psychological
phenomenon, it is what-you-want vs what-you-can-afford,
and your happiness is dependent on this. It
means nothing to me if my '93 Nissan is
a much better car than the Predident's Trouman.
As long as my car is the worst car on lot, but
I wish I had a Lexus, then I am still very miserable.
too little to worth starting a fight.
using Linux; furthermore, why should I spend
my time to persuaded others? I don't care.
As for those who are circulating ill-information
to the public, well, there is not much you
can do to stop them. The will continue to
circulate fud regardless of how much you
try to stop them. No much you can do about it,
assuming you actually desire to do something
about it.
the Internet, but you are for denial-attacks
by phone and letters? Weird...
Usualy people are either for or against attacks,
and they do make coherenet arguments, at least more that those who are
picky about particular kinds of attacks but not other similar attacks.
court where (as expected) they cannot show
evidence to support *their* allegations. They
are already in a down-spiral. Apparently,
the only thing it can distruct everyone from
the main issue at hand (avoidance to show
evidence) is to spread stories about Denial-attacts.
Like Linus said, if anyone has to grow up
that is Mr. McBride himself and for ESR (owr clown) who
will will not miss the spotlight to promote
himself by issuing orders (?) for linuxers
to stop the attacks(?) . Once again, it is self-promotion
in play, for McBride and ESR. Same movie again, and we have seen it
many times before.
I did not know that SCO printed so many pages
and handed them to court; for I remeber
SCO complaining in court that they could
not provide evidence for *their* claims because
(seriously) the "evidence" are so many
and plentiful they
buy ink for the printer. I'm glad they found
the money.
all you could do is sue in civil court for
damages. But in this case is beyond contracts,
it is about actually going to jail because
you copied (into a low-quality medium) some
parts of the movie. You get to go to jail
for, essentially, for stealing peanuts from
the movie barons, while McBride and his gang
of criminals are free to rob the public without
any real change of being arrested through
citizen's arrest or ever going to jail. We are
talking about applying heavy-handed penalties
to common citizens, while ignoring applying
similar concepts to common criminals.
will just finance (read, buy "lisences") another
company. The SCO's will never end.
Rinse. Repeat.
The judge asked SCO to specify the code; no
problem, he will receive the whole Linux kernel,
and perhaps the BSD and SGI kernel also.
In other news, SCO's later open letter has
given me a good idea. I will refuse to abide
by the terms of my rent agreement, and if they
take me to court i will be to say that my landlord
is a communist and thus he does not respect
the property rights represented by our national
currency. Why should I abide by the contract when
his very own beliefs are against it. It fact,
my landloard should instead be paying me because
this is what the US Constition means when
by granting me the "pursuit of happiness". How
can anyone be happy without free shelter, or
my ability to profit from the property of
others? I have to rent other people's property for free, then
sub-lease it others for a fee in order to
pursuit happiness, as the US Constitution
obligates me to.
enjoy the Spam on Slashdot and the garbage
at your TV without complain.
No. You are not in a position to tell me what
to do. It is up to me, what you desire is
irrelevent (and so is your argument, which
you faithfully repeating like a parrot what you have been
taught, and never had he chance to think how
silly it actually is.
I will continue to complain about Slashdot's spam. Thanks a million.
you don't like what is on TV, why don't you
go to the theater." Or, if "if you don't like
this station, why don't you switch to another
one."
The problem with such comments is that it
ignores the fact that Slashdot has become
a tabloid magazine. No! I don't want to read
such articles, shift through them, or associate
with the crowd that has losts its balls to
complain!
Complaining is healthy human attribute; at least,
it is a lot better than the characteristics of
people who have don't have given up in
complaining and no longer object to being
bombarded to Slashdot's SCO spam.
Do you receive spam through email? Should you
then complain about it, orjust close
your account in protest and stop
using the Internet?
And how about drug-trafficing in your home time. You
should complain about that too and do something
about it, instead of just moving to another town.
be decided according to the law. It makes
no difference if FSF is for or against copyrights,
since regardless of what they believe the
whole issue is about the law, not my or your
beliefs about copyrights.
SCO started this legal case about copyrights
and we have been waiting for almost a year
to show us the evidence for *their* lawsuit.
If they start twisting their arguments towards
my personal beliefs on copyrights then I
have to remind them it the law and their evidence
that counts. My personal beliefes, or the
beliefs of FSF are irrelevent!
We heard enought from the rope dancers.
allegation or about censoring McBride out
of the picture. Our issue is about covering
the SCO story every 5 friking minutes between
now and March 2005.
I think the issue has become a daily Slashdot spam,
which will be repeated later in the day if
McBride opens his mouth again, for whatever reason.
Enough!