It's rather interesting to see how uninformed the public is when it comes to homosexuality in the Middle East. Gay sex is actually quite profound over there (they see the male and female roles differently then we do).
Besides, it's not like the Pentagon ordered people to be "tortured" in Abu Ghraib. With the above FACT in mind, I might even only see this as a slight humiliation, versus their side that enjoys cutting off the HEADS of innocents (while I am not condoning the Abu Ghraib stuff, at least they were fighting us).
There has not been a proven case of torture at Guantanamo Bay. Though there have been a bunch of terrorists released that went right back to fighting us in Afghanistan. Yay for hippies. I love how non-citizen, enemy combatants get Constitutional rights.
The government IS prosecuting the soldiers responsible for the humiliation (that's all it was) of the prisoners. You people that do not see this are just intentionally turning a blind eye and it is quite sickening. Comparing Bush to bin Laden is just as sick. I must be responding to Michael Moore.
"We're killing millions of innocents everyday under the orders of G.W. !" I am just waiting for one of you to bring that in to play.
This should be developed by one of the nuclear engineering firms, such as AREVA and not a bunch of students, regardless of whether it is to be open source or not (which most code in the nuclear field ends up being that is used like this).
See the reply to the other post for clarification of why I am done wasting my time on you, hippy.
For my final point. Google: define: free
people who are free; "the home of the free and the brave"
grant freedom to; free from confinement
free from obligations or duties
costing nothing; "complimentary tickets"
Weakness or not, I guess it might just be another poor decision by the OSS movement because saying "pay for free software" is about the biggest weakness in an argument that I can imagine. You benevolent geniuses could have used the word "Freedom" in whole if that is what you meant, but I guess maybe you were trying to mask another problem with your ideal.
Boohoo. I'm done fighting the exact same argument from you. "You're mean; free software is the light; corporations are evil." Cry me a river and then get yourself a job.
I like your argument. There are give and take points in it.
The other guy is just a hippy that repeats himself and doesn't like "mean" words. I'm done responding to him because of his cyclic argument ("Free software will save us." and of course "Paying for something destroys freedom.").
I still see no long term benefits from free software, mostly because all of the existing free software out there is just a copy of some proprietor's software. Apache is the most innovative free software that I have seen as far as features go (and of course BSD, but that's truly free software that will probably never go mainstream, but I wish it would dominate Linux as it should) and the code in Apache is just awful in the parts I was looking at.
In the vast majority of cases, free software is playing catch up and never innovating. I am looking at things like gnome and KDE, but all I see are ugly UIs (especially by default, but if you want to talk customizations then we can look at Windows and Mac customizations as well), yet these are hyped to no end.
To sum it up, they're just copy cats. Whenever MS adds a feature to their web server that has existed in Apache, or any other product for that matter, then suddenly they are the bane of society for copying, but the second Apache does it (or OpenOffice.org for example), then they are the champions of the free software movement. Besides, most of the features that free software beat companies like Microsoft too are simply because MS announced said features ahead of releasing a product that has a product life cycle that "free" software can skip. So they're just playing a verbal catch up (I am thinking Mono right now).
Again, I refer to my comments that people with real jobs cannot simply pick up where another developer of a huge, many thousands of lines program left off. It's a nice thought, but it's just not realistic.
Second part:
Lets see, the way that free software people seem to think is that someone else should always put in the effort with their R&D and then hand over everything to say, you. Then, you take that code and make one change and start selling it as your own software. Maybe you just change the name, who knows.
Now, lets say you do this and Microsoft does this across the board one day.
Microsoft is the brand name that every person in the real world knows and loves. You are just another person. You create something equivalent, but that is a FOAK, to this Borland product. Microsoft takes it and has its army of programmers rebrand it and ship it out with Office, or Visual Studio, or something similar. (I am thinking J++ right now, and oh no, evil Microsoft cannot do that, right guys?!)
I think you'd be crying a different game there. Their product would not be any better. The end users choice would still be there.
Or lets think of another scenario. Borland develops the next C++ Builder or whatever, and releases it on your terms. You, or maybe me, goes in, changes it, and starts selling it under the same license (obviously). Now, Borland just takes it back and sells it as though it made it (you know, as one of us would have done with their product), and continues to dominate the market. No innovation comes from them at this point. Just like IBM and more importantly, RedHat, they have the drones of the OSS world doing all the work for them.
Or lets go the third route. Borland creates the next iteration of the software and they release it on a closed license, with no available source code. They make all of their R&D back and continue to make profits (hopefully, for their sake) and free software people whine and moan. At the end of the day, they're making all of the money from their product, as opposed to somebody else like us that simply added a toolbar feature or fixed a typo error in a menu, and then resold it.
You're probably playing through your Utopia right now about how this would never happen in a free software world. No one would do that! But, if the option was available, then you at least SHOULD know that they damn well would. Why R&D when some other idiot will do it for you for free?
Third part:
"paying for free software"
I don't think I should have to go much further, but I think I will. This just reiterates my above point. Someone ELSE should pay for your R&D?! What a nice world.
"Free software is socially important because it grants people the freedom to make their computers behave in the way they wish."
Isn't that a sweet image. Viruses are free. Worms are free. Let's hook my mother up with Linux and let her get it to behave as she wishes it too. No? Oh, she has an easier time doing this with Windows, thanks.
By giving away your source code to your competition effectively makes you compete with YOURSELF. Corporate espionage is illegal for a reason, and yet you are saying that you should give away all of your secrets (the source code) to your competition. Awesome. Start a business, I love this idea. You would NEVER be one step ahead of the competition. This is such a pathetic idea of how to run a business that it honestly baffles me.
"Jumping from one proprietor to another is merely selecting a new master, that is not freedom."
Lets say I am running Mac OS X, that beloved OS of the non-Linux world (the next best thing). Are you suggesting that when I use Microsoft Office on Mac OS X, that I am somehow under the slavery of Microsoft? Or maybe I am just always the slave of OS X?
Get a job. If you have one, then great: Get a real one. If you honestly feel this is how a business should be run, then have fun explaining this strategy to your bosses.
Actually, that scratch the install CD thing isn't always true. I scratched a development CD of a very old version of a piece of software (say, version 3 versus the current version 7) and I wanted the version 3, which I could not find anywhere. The company just gave me it.
Obviously that's a limited example, but the Open source example also assumes there is a recent mirror and that you are willing to do it. A lot of people actually have jobs, and do not have the time to redevelop/reverse engineer applications for a feature that just should be there, but that does not have to be there (one of those things that makes life a little bit easier).
Plus, have you looked at many OSS source code recently? I have, and most of them are very poorly documented, especially in terms of commented code (even Apache 2; I was looking at the AliasMatch code).
The beauty of OSS is that the option is available, but in way too many cases the time it takes to learn a crappy code base is not worth the effort. Look at the Blog implementation, WordPress. It's great if you want exactly what it has to offer. However, if you don't then you have to go searching for where functions are declared and track through the dependencies, not to mention the spaghetti code! I was able to get it to what I wanted, but that's one of those wonderful OSS things that everyone brags about and it is a web.
I realize that most Slashdotters are users of Windows, but the vast majority turn around and use the much loved acronym: M$. They're probably just too stupid to use Linux. Or just hypocrits.
I say open source company because Novell is running headstrong with Linux.
I give up. You people love being hypocrits. Good for you.
Any closed source defends itself. Closed source defending open source does not make sense.
"Any closed source firm does it" represents a firm, say Intel, doing what is suggested here. If Intel did that, then every Slashdotter would be all over them barking mad, but since we are talking about an open source company doing it, then it's a-okay.
Take your ordinary technically challenged customer request, as inept as they may be, and then we try to create the product to fit the request. Sometimes you hit the nail on the head, but sometimes the nail hits you because the customer did not explain it correctly [or when talking to customers, "you did not understand"].
Now take the same request, and translate it into whatever language and then give it to users in a different region of the world (likely a different understanding of things/casual ideas) and guess what kind of a cluster you'll get (hint: cluster f...)? It also probably goes without mentioning that most of them do not have real world experience. What they do over there is just study, nonstop, but they do not implement. They are extremely devoted students and that is why many in the U.S. out perform their peers because not only do they have their study/work ethic, but they also get the chance to DO.
A bunch of certifications mean nothing. I'll go a step forward, most certifications mean nothing.
Don't forget that the more supervision costs money too.
Even if the supervisors were already there, they still are having hours (likely more than previously) diverted for inexperienced, or incoherent employees.
Oh those poor Iraqi civilians! They're all just as innocent as can be.
Not only does that website not list WHOSE gunfire killed who, but it also just believes any figure thrown at them. I bet I could email them and say 50-140 people were killed at another wedding, without cake (at midnight+ of course because apparently that's prime time for weddings over there) by US Special Forces just walking in a mowing them down.
I am sure it is the goal of our military to walk around and kill innocent people as you idiots try to make it out to be.
None of these websites take circumstances into anything AND you're the same people bitching about Fallujah and Najaf and how we are just letting them go crazy. Once something is done, you try to find civilians. Hell, if they weren't holding a gun at that instant, then they aren't terrorists I guess. Zarquawi could probably be hit directly by a bomb and get listed on that site.
It's really simple actually and quite ingenius for the bandwidth speed.
For instance, if you go under IE and right click -> View Source, then you see some random looking gibberish.
However, if you go under View -> Source, then you see it referencing a JavaScript file. Just look at the [obfuscated] JavaScript file and voila.
I do not understand how Sun's lawyers looked over the argument that API calls to the system match the patent. There's no way this patent was dragged out so long by Kodak as to predate these calls AND still exist today (since I could imagine they could keep 'innovating' the patent for 10 years before they finally thought they'd be able to use it for 'good' purposes, which would effectively give the patent a 22 year life).
"When a government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it..."
I don't think the four fathers had a close election in mind. Just because you disagree with the guy that won, and the system that is in place that elected him, does not mean all hell should have broken loose. The point of the system with checks and all is to ensure all hell does NOT break loose.
The people in the lower brackets don't pay taxes. They're protected by income tax brackets. Read: There is NO burden on them.
Who said I was angry? I am just willing to fight and do what is necessary.
The federal government has put more money into the education system in the past 4 years than ever before; it's not their fault that the states/local governments swindle it away! Have you ever been to a school board meeting? These people are just as power hungry as congressmen!
I don't think anyone has argued that Indian's are more "fit" in terms of coding efficiency. They're just cheaper. It's like any other industry.
You do realize that you are suggesting that a model democracy WOULD have broken into civil war over a close election. That is absurd.
Tax cuts for the wealthy, huh?
50% of the population pays at least 95% of the taxes. I realize this may make no sense to liberals, but when a tax cut comes, the people that actually PAY taxes will get something, while those that do NOT pay taxes will be left with the same situation. Also, if government is managed properly and wasteful spending is cut out (which neither party does well, which is completely and entirely awful), then no one should even notice with the exception of those who have some more money to spend.
Currently, I am middle class (programmer) and I received a nice return from the tax cuts and I honestly feel I can spend my money a heck of a lot more wisely than the government can for me. Let's go blow some more money on some random social program.
Who makes jobs?
A) The wealthy?
B) The businesses?
C) The government?
If you answered C), as opposed to A) and B), then there is your problem. You are depending on the government for a hand out. Also, where do you think that hand out comes from? The loop starts by taking money from the tax payers, with the largest burden falling on the wealthy and larger businesses.
Constantly scared? I am not scared. Maybe you pansy liberals are, but I am willing to fight for my country.
Stupid. Interesting, trying to give people a better education and then GUARANTEEING it is stupid. That other stuff you mentioned is a social issue and simply has to do with the interests of the week.
Please tell me that you are not a programmer or in a position that can influence software architecture.
Oh I know, we could turn around and take all of the money from the wealthy and give it to teachers!! After all, they work from 8:30 AM to 3:15 PM with a free class period [no students] (in my state at least), plus a 45 minute break ["flex" in my area], plus an hour lunch, for 180 days a year, minus canceled days (every other 5 canceled school days do not have to made up in my state). Who wants to do the Math on a teacher's hourly wages and then justify a raise for them.
It would have actually helped your argument a lot more had you explained the reasoning behind the Civil War without just a wikipedia reference.
Anyway, at the time of the Civil War the US was practically two different countries. I am not simply comparing the industry versus the agriculture, but the thoughts and political leanings of both groups were vastly different.
It would be similar to having the Middle East representing the "South," while the modern US represents the "North." They just disagree on everything.
In short, it was not a dispute. It was everything (and aside from what schools are teaching now, it was not to end slavery..., which came as an added bonus).
The fact that the country did not break into civil war is because we ARE a model democracy.
This applies whether you agree with the outcome of the election or not.
The idea that a close vote means that we're unstable is ridiculous. There are rules and regulations for these scenarios and they were followed. Unfortunately, a few were added as well (ah hem, hanging chads), but all hell did NOT break loose and the results were LAWFULLY established.
Slashdot Mirror
Besides, it's not like the Pentagon ordered people to be "tortured" in Abu Ghraib. With the above FACT in mind, I might even only see this as a slight humiliation, versus their side that enjoys cutting off the HEADS of innocents (while I am not condoning the Abu Ghraib stuff, at least they were fighting us).
There has not been a proven case of torture at Guantanamo Bay. Though there have been a bunch of terrorists released that went right back to fighting us in Afghanistan. Yay for hippies. I love how non-citizen, enemy combatants get Constitutional rights.
The government IS prosecuting the soldiers responsible for the humiliation (that's all it was) of the prisoners. You people that do not see this are just intentionally turning a blind eye and it is quite sickening. Comparing Bush to bin Laden is just as sick. I must be responding to Michael Moore.
"We're killing millions of innocents everyday under the orders of G.W. !" I am just waiting for one of you to bring that in to play.
Much to most of the Slashdot communities pleasure, I am sure, there are not many nuclear engineering schools left.
This should be developed by one of the nuclear engineering firms, such as AREVA and not a bunch of students, regardless of whether it is to be open source or not (which most code in the nuclear field ends up being that is used like this).
People say S-Q-L and Sequel for simply SQL. Personally, I say the former, but pretty much every SQL books has a paragraph devoted to this dilemma.
Kerry, when he agrees with you on this issue.
Kerry, when he disagrees with you on this issue.
Bush, when he holds his position.
For my final point. Google: define: free people who are free; "the home of the free and the brave" grant freedom to; free from confinement free from obligations or duties costing nothing; "complimentary tickets"
Weakness or not, I guess it might just be another poor decision by the OSS movement because saying "pay for free software" is about the biggest weakness in an argument that I can imagine. You benevolent geniuses could have used the word "Freedom" in whole if that is what you meant, but I guess maybe you were trying to mask another problem with your ideal.
Boohoo. I'm done fighting the exact same argument from you. "You're mean; free software is the light; corporations are evil." Cry me a river and then get yourself a job.
The other guy is just a hippy that repeats himself and doesn't like "mean" words. I'm done responding to him because of his cyclic argument ("Free software will save us." and of course "Paying for something destroys freedom.").
I still see no long term benefits from free software, mostly because all of the existing free software out there is just a copy of some proprietor's software. Apache is the most innovative free software that I have seen as far as features go (and of course BSD, but that's truly free software that will probably never go mainstream, but I wish it would dominate Linux as it should) and the code in Apache is just awful in the parts I was looking at.
In the vast majority of cases, free software is playing catch up and never innovating. I am looking at things like gnome and KDE, but all I see are ugly UIs (especially by default, but if you want to talk customizations then we can look at Windows and Mac customizations as well), yet these are hyped to no end.
To sum it up, they're just copy cats. Whenever MS adds a feature to their web server that has existed in Apache, or any other product for that matter, then suddenly they are the bane of society for copying, but the second Apache does it (or OpenOffice.org for example), then they are the champions of the free software movement. Besides, most of the features that free software beat companies like Microsoft too are simply because MS announced said features ahead of releasing a product that has a product life cycle that "free" software can skip. So they're just playing a verbal catch up (I am thinking Mono right now).
Again, I refer to my comments that people with real jobs cannot simply pick up where another developer of a huge, many thousands of lines program left off. It's a nice thought, but it's just not realistic.
Second part:
Lets see, the way that free software people seem to think is that someone else should always put in the effort with their R&D and then hand over everything to say, you. Then, you take that code and make one change and start selling it as your own software. Maybe you just change the name, who knows.
Now, lets say you do this and Microsoft does this across the board one day.
Microsoft is the brand name that every person in the real world knows and loves. You are just another person. You create something equivalent, but that is a FOAK, to this Borland product. Microsoft takes it and has its army of programmers rebrand it and ship it out with Office, or Visual Studio, or something similar. (I am thinking J++ right now, and oh no, evil Microsoft cannot do that, right guys?!)
I think you'd be crying a different game there. Their product would not be any better. The end users choice would still be there.
Or lets think of another scenario. Borland develops the next C++ Builder or whatever, and releases it on your terms. You, or maybe me, goes in, changes it, and starts selling it under the same license (obviously). Now, Borland just takes it back and sells it as though it made it (you know, as one of us would have done with their product), and continues to dominate the market. No innovation comes from them at this point. Just like IBM and more importantly, RedHat, they have the drones of the OSS world doing all the work for them.
Or lets go the third route. Borland creates the next iteration of the software and they release it on a closed license, with no available source code. They make all of their R&D back and continue to make profits (hopefully, for their sake) and free software people whine and moan. At the end of the day, they're making all of the money from their product, as opposed to somebody else like us that simply added a toolbar feature or fixed a typo error in a menu, and then resold it.
You're probably playing through your Utopia right now about how this would never happen in a free software world. No one would do that! But, if the option was available, then you at least SHOULD know that they damn well would. Why R&D when some other idiot will do it for you for free?
Third part:
"paying for free software"
I don't think I should have to go much further, but I think I will. This just reiterates my above point. Someone ELSE should pay for your R&D?! What a nice world.
"Free software is socially important because it grants people the freedom to make their computers behave in the way they wish."
Isn't that a sweet image. Viruses are free. Worms are free. Let's hook my mother up with Linux and let her get it to behave as she wishes it too. No? Oh, she has an easier time doing this with Windows, thanks.
By giving away your source code to your competition effectively makes you compete with YOURSELF. Corporate espionage is illegal for a reason, and yet you are saying that you should give away all of your secrets (the source code) to your competition. Awesome. Start a business, I love this idea. You would NEVER be one step ahead of the competition. This is such a pathetic idea of how to run a business that it honestly baffles me.
"Jumping from one proprietor to another is merely selecting a new master, that is not freedom."
Lets say I am running Mac OS X, that beloved OS of the non-Linux world (the next best thing). Are you suggesting that when I use Microsoft Office on Mac OS X, that I am somehow under the slavery of Microsoft? Or maybe I am just always the slave of OS X?
Get a job. If you have one, then great: Get a real one. If you honestly feel this is how a business should be run, then have fun explaining this strategy to your bosses.
Hippies make me sick.
Obviously that's a limited example, but the Open source example also assumes there is a recent mirror and that you are willing to do it. A lot of people actually have jobs, and do not have the time to redevelop/reverse engineer applications for a feature that just should be there, but that does not have to be there (one of those things that makes life a little bit easier).
Plus, have you looked at many OSS source code recently? I have, and most of them are very poorly documented, especially in terms of commented code (even Apache 2; I was looking at the AliasMatch code).
The beauty of OSS is that the option is available, but in way too many cases the time it takes to learn a crappy code base is not worth the effort. Look at the Blog implementation, WordPress. It's great if you want exactly what it has to offer. However, if you don't then you have to go searching for where functions are declared and track through the dependencies, not to mention the spaghetti code! I was able to get it to what I wanted, but that's one of those wonderful OSS things that everyone brags about and it is a web.
The only problem I've had is that C++.NET is a horrible language, but the full support for C++ is still there and it still rocks.
If the company (READ FOR MORONS: developers) do not feel like supporting the software, then THEY STOP.
What does the free market dictate? YOU GO SOMEWHERE ELSE (READ FOR MORONS: take your business somewhere else). Stop acting like you have a damn clue.
Whether you take your "business" to free software or not is your choice. THAT IS FREEDOM.
You damn hippies are just tools.
I say open source company because Novell is running headstrong with Linux.
I give up. You people love being hypocrits. Good for you.
"Any closed source firm does it" represents a firm, say Intel, doing what is suggested here. If Intel did that, then every Slashdotter would be all over them barking mad, but since we are talking about an open source company doing it, then it's a-okay.
H y p o c r i t s.
Take your ordinary technically challenged customer request, as inept as they may be, and then we try to create the product to fit the request. Sometimes you hit the nail on the head, but sometimes the nail hits you because the customer did not explain it correctly [or when talking to customers, "you did not understand"].
Now take the same request, and translate it into whatever language and then give it to users in a different region of the world (likely a different understanding of things/casual ideas) and guess what kind of a cluster you'll get (hint: cluster f...)? It also probably goes without mentioning that most of them do not have real world experience. What they do over there is just study, nonstop, but they do not implement. They are extremely devoted students and that is why many in the U.S. out perform their peers because not only do they have their study/work ethic, but they also get the chance to DO.
A bunch of certifications mean nothing. I'll go a step forward, most certifications mean nothing.
Even if the supervisors were already there, they still are having hours (likely more than previously) diverted for inexperienced, or incoherent employees.
That read the article and said "hypocrits" ?
Any closed source firm does it and it is just another evil corporation. Any open source firm does it and it correlates to world peace.
Not only does that website not list WHOSE gunfire killed who, but it also just believes any figure thrown at them. I bet I could email them and say 50-140 people were killed at another wedding, without cake (at midnight+ of course because apparently that's prime time for weddings over there) by US Special Forces just walking in a mowing them down.
I am sure it is the goal of our military to walk around and kill innocent people as you idiots try to make it out to be.
None of these websites take circumstances into anything AND you're the same people bitching about Fallujah and Najaf and how we are just letting them go crazy. Once something is done, you try to find civilians. Hell, if they weren't holding a gun at that instant, then they aren't terrorists I guess. Zarquawi could probably be hit directly by a bomb and get listed on that site.
Mod me down.
It's really simple actually and quite ingenius for the bandwidth speed. For instance, if you go under IE and right click -> View Source, then you see some random looking gibberish. However, if you go under View -> Source, then you see it referencing a JavaScript file. Just look at the [obfuscated] JavaScript file and voila.
I do not understand how Sun's lawyers looked over the argument that API calls to the system match the patent. There's no way this patent was dragged out so long by Kodak as to predate these calls AND still exist today (since I could imagine they could keep 'innovating' the patent for 10 years before they finally thought they'd be able to use it for 'good' purposes, which would effectively give the patent a 22 year life).
Admittedly, I am extremely conservative and I feel that vouchers are a good thing.
I don't think the four fathers had a close election in mind. Just because you disagree with the guy that won, and the system that is in place that elected him, does not mean all hell should have broken loose. The point of the system with checks and all is to ensure all hell does NOT break loose.
The people in the lower brackets don't pay taxes. They're protected by income tax brackets. Read: There is NO burden on them.
Who said I was angry? I am just willing to fight and do what is necessary.
The federal government has put more money into the education system in the past 4 years than ever before; it's not their fault that the states/local governments swindle it away! Have you ever been to a school board meeting? These people are just as power hungry as congressmen!
I don't think anyone has argued that Indian's are more "fit" in terms of coding efficiency. They're just cheaper. It's like any other industry.
Tax cuts for the wealthy, huh?
50% of the population pays at least 95% of the taxes. I realize this may make no sense to liberals, but when a tax cut comes, the people that actually PAY taxes will get something, while those that do NOT pay taxes will be left with the same situation. Also, if government is managed properly and wasteful spending is cut out (which neither party does well, which is completely and entirely awful), then no one should even notice with the exception of those who have some more money to spend.
Currently, I am middle class (programmer) and I received a nice return from the tax cuts and I honestly feel I can spend my money a heck of a lot more wisely than the government can for me. Let's go blow some more money on some random social program.
Who makes jobs?
- A) The wealthy?
- B) The businesses?
- C) The government?
If you answered C), as opposed to A) and B), then there is your problem. You are depending on the government for a hand out. Also, where do you think that hand out comes from? The loop starts by taking money from the tax payers, with the largest burden falling on the wealthy and larger businesses.Constantly scared? I am not scared. Maybe you pansy liberals are, but I am willing to fight for my country.
Stupid. Interesting, trying to give people a better education and then GUARANTEEING it is stupid. That other stuff you mentioned is a social issue and simply has to do with the interests of the week.
Please tell me that you are not a programmer or in a position that can influence software architecture.
Oh I know, we could turn around and take all of the money from the wealthy and give it to teachers!! After all, they work from 8:30 AM to 3:15 PM with a free class period [no students] (in my state at least), plus a 45 minute break ["flex" in my area], plus an hour lunch, for 180 days a year, minus canceled days (every other 5 canceled school days do not have to made up in my state). Who wants to do the Math on a teacher's hourly wages and then justify a raise for them.
Anyway, at the time of the Civil War the US was practically two different countries. I am not simply comparing the industry versus the agriculture, but the thoughts and political leanings of both groups were vastly different.
It would be similar to having the Middle East representing the "South," while the modern US represents the "North." They just disagree on everything.
In short, it was not a dispute. It was everything (and aside from what schools are teaching now, it was not to end slavery..., which came as an added bonus).
The fact that the country did not break into civil war is because we ARE a model democracy.
This applies whether you agree with the outcome of the election or not.
The idea that a close vote means that we're unstable is ridiculous. There are rules and regulations for these scenarios and they were followed. Unfortunately, a few were added as well (ah hem, hanging chads), but all hell did NOT break loose and the results were LAWFULLY established.
It's funny, the difference between what people in the [nuclear] industry know, and what many of you think you know.
There is not a GoogleNBC.com.
In a word, I'm still right.