Then don't install the firmware. Simple, really. Or perhaps another way to look at it: what right to Apple firmware updates do you have if you're not using the phone the way they intended it to be used?
Why do people find calculating tips to be so difficult? Just leave the total on the check, and write a note saying "here's a tip: get a job where they actually pay you."
And when it doesn't go away, you've wasted your time. Why are people so set on anticipating a catastrophe that will probably never come, and would likely wipe out everyone if it did?
Also, considering the intense frugality often displayed here, I wonder how many people would actually be willing to pay the higher prices that would result from American manufacturing? Probably not enough to get it going again, considering how quickly it shut down.
If the best you can come up with is "but they probably do it too" then you really ought to either think harder or give up on the reply. Just friendly advice, take it as you wish.
I'm sorry, how is what you did in any way similar to what Vonage does? Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but it sure as hell doesn't sound like you were doing anything even close to what they do.
I believe that to be a fallacy. Without copyright, people could share binaries with no repercussions, but getting a hold of the source would still be nearly impossible.
I do enjoy that you think you understand my motivations. I enjoy even more the fact that you have to be anonymous to express your angst with me. It's a tingly feeling, knowing a coward thinks he understands me.
Apparently I do understand it, and you don't get my point. I'm not arguing about the freedoms, I'm not arguing about the spirit or intent of the GPL. I'm saying it's murky, and I'm saying the FSF engages in spin attempts through word games. Plain and simple, sir.
It's all good, in the end. I expected the zealot masses to rise up and explain to me very carefully how I'm stupid, using bad analogies and seizing on the wrong points. I've dealt with it here for years.
Sure, I get that. But there's an ever-increasing complication that makes things more difficult with each go-round. In general, simplification is a desirable goal.
Also, there's no point in shifting the blame. Sure, the legal system makes everything impossible. Playing into that game and supporting it (as the FSF does, by choice or by necessity) means that the blame falls squarely back on those shoulders.
I was expressing an honest concern, and trying to do so in a memorable way. It's not that I disagree with the GPLv3 (or any version, really.) Personally, I think it's a fine license, and I understand it and its goals, or at least I believe I do. That uncertainty, however, is the kicker.
Ultimately, the GPL has begun the process that all legalese follows - it is now becoming too complicated to understand without paying a lawyer a very large sum of money. Given the target audience and the goals, this is not a good thing.
The thing is, I don't disagree with you. I'm fine with the GPL in any form, because frankly, it's the author's decision to use it and I respect that. My point is that it's a confusing muddle to wade through, particularly given the FSF's propensity (and RMS in particular is guilty of this) for playing "clever" wordgames with everything that they touch. There's a point where clear talk about the realities of the situation serve the cause better than rhetoric designed to spin the upsides and hide the downsides, which is very much what most explanation of the GPL come down to.
I'm not saying don't use it. I'm not even saying it's bad. I'm saying it is murky, and the article makes perfect sense to me because of that murkiness.
Since people regularly denounce the mundane as evil and in general take very subjective positions on all morality, perhaps it's time to retire the rhetoric and stop using emotionally loaded terms for all conversations involving Google.
I'm not holding my breath, particularly not with the people around Slashdot.
Those restrictions are for your freedom. It is important to take freedom away to protect it. Truly allowing freedom would allow freedom to be taken away, and we can't allow that, so we've taken away some freedom to allow true freedom to flourish.
I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't understand that perfectly.
And I'm sure I'll get modded down, but before you do that, read through my first paragraph carefully and tell me what I've said differently than the GNU people.
Why shouldn't they set prices? Anything higher than free is used as justification to pirate anyway. What's the point in going low when the "opposition" doesn't want to pay anyway?
Slashdot Mirror
Then don't install the firmware. Simple, really. Or perhaps another way to look at it: what right to Apple firmware updates do you have if you're not using the phone the way they intended it to be used?
Ehhh... I think it would be nicer, but that doesn't mean they're doing anything wrong.
Apple says "If you've modified your phone in an unsupported way, the next firmware update may brick it."
The firmware is released, and only installed if you allow it to be.
What is the problem here? Anyone who bricked their phone did it to themselves. Or are you just super-anti-corporate man?
Are you trying to tell me you don't have a room in your house set aside for nothing but storage devices, and a...
Bah, I can't even finish this. Every damn technological advance has to be poopooed by geeks. It's so freaking annoying I want to cry.
Why do people find calculating tips to be so difficult? Just leave the total on the check, and write a note saying "here's a tip: get a job where they actually pay you."
Easy as pie.
And when it doesn't go away, you've wasted your time. Why are people so set on anticipating a catastrophe that will probably never come, and would likely wipe out everyone if it did?
Preparing for those situations is most likely a waste of time. Do you also play the lottery?
Just add the "...at first" mentally and you'll feel better.
Also, considering the intense frugality often displayed here, I wonder how many people would actually be willing to pay the higher prices that would result from American manufacturing? Probably not enough to get it going again, considering how quickly it shut down.
We didn't even get promises. We didn't know there were rocks we were missing out on.
I can't imagine why they wouldn't welcome their own obsolescence. People are generally so good at that.
You're forgiven. Kilowatt-hours are how electricity is sold in the US. Now you know, and knowing is half the battle.
If the best you can come up with is "but they probably do it too" then you really ought to either think harder or give up on the reply. Just friendly advice, take it as you wish.
Laws cannot be open to discussion or question? So you invite totalitarianism?
I'm sorry, how is what you did in any way similar to what Vonage does? Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but it sure as hell doesn't sound like you were doing anything even close to what they do.
I believe that to be a fallacy. Without copyright, people could share binaries with no repercussions, but getting a hold of the source would still be nearly impossible.
Which strawman is that, fanclub?
I do enjoy that you think you understand my motivations. I enjoy even more the fact that you have to be anonymous to express your angst with me. It's a tingly feeling, knowing a coward thinks he understands me.
Apparently I do understand it, and you don't get my point. I'm not arguing about the freedoms, I'm not arguing about the spirit or intent of the GPL. I'm saying it's murky, and I'm saying the FSF engages in spin attempts through word games. Plain and simple, sir.
It's all good, in the end. I expected the zealot masses to rise up and explain to me very carefully how I'm stupid, using bad analogies and seizing on the wrong points. I've dealt with it here for years.
Sure, I get that. But there's an ever-increasing complication that makes things more difficult with each go-round. In general, simplification is a desirable goal.
Also, there's no point in shifting the blame. Sure, the legal system makes everything impossible. Playing into that game and supporting it (as the FSF does, by choice or by necessity) means that the blame falls squarely back on those shoulders.
I was expressing an honest concern, and trying to do so in a memorable way. It's not that I disagree with the GPLv3 (or any version, really.) Personally, I think it's a fine license, and I understand it and its goals, or at least I believe I do. That uncertainty, however, is the kicker.
Ultimately, the GPL has begun the process that all legalese follows - it is now becoming too complicated to understand without paying a lawyer a very large sum of money. Given the target audience and the goals, this is not a good thing.
The thing is, I don't disagree with you. I'm fine with the GPL in any form, because frankly, it's the author's decision to use it and I respect that. My point is that it's a confusing muddle to wade through, particularly given the FSF's propensity (and RMS in particular is guilty of this) for playing "clever" wordgames with everything that they touch. There's a point where clear talk about the realities of the situation serve the cause better than rhetoric designed to spin the upsides and hide the downsides, which is very much what most explanation of the GPL come down to.
I'm not saying don't use it. I'm not even saying it's bad. I'm saying it is murky, and the article makes perfect sense to me because of that murkiness.
Since people regularly denounce the mundane as evil and in general take very subjective positions on all morality, perhaps it's time to retire the rhetoric and stop using emotionally loaded terms for all conversations involving Google.
I'm not holding my breath, particularly not with the people around Slashdot.
Those restrictions are for your freedom. It is important to take freedom away to protect it. Truly allowing freedom would allow freedom to be taken away, and we can't allow that, so we've taken away some freedom to allow true freedom to flourish.
I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't understand that perfectly.
And I'm sure I'll get modded down, but before you do that, read through my first paragraph carefully and tell me what I've said differently than the GNU people.
Why shouldn't they set prices? Anything higher than free is used as justification to pirate anyway. What's the point in going low when the "opposition" doesn't want to pay anyway?
Yay for dropping belief as fact.