I find it excessively arrogant that you presume to speak for all geeks. I'm sure you're also a 20 percenter, since there is no clear majority of political thought.
What about the 30 year olds who still live in their parent's basement, post anonymously on Slashdot, and rip into other people for the faults they see in themselves?
There wasn't a single technical reason in that post. There was a lot of speculation about market forces, but considering the economic stupidity I've seen around here, plus the fact that a large contingent of posters are socialist and hence understand the market about as well as I understand the feeling of childbirth, I'm going to have to say it's all pretty easy to dismiss.
I think Obama is the best available candidate as well, but for purely practical reasons. Republicans would stand in opposition to Hillary throughout her presidency on principle, Huckabee is a frightening and shallow bastard, McCain is insane and warmongering, and Romney believes in space jesus so he's pretty much out in my book. Obama wins by default. It doesn't hurt that he's likable, although it doesn't help that like all politicians, it's infuriatingly difficult to get a straight answer from him until his back is against the wall.
Oh, and Ron Paul. Yeah, like he'll even come close.
They've also made significant capital investments that no one else has bothered making, and they sell a luxury item. If broadband access were a necessity, I could understand your case, but since it isn't, I don't.
(and in your world, the rest of the world must be pretty small because the US has most places shattered so far as internet access goes. A few socialist European countries and a few technology obsessed Asian countries have us beat. So? I fail to see the problem there.)
Compared to all the people living to today, American football is older. So age is actually nothing meaningful at all in this context.
Of course, I don't get a hard on for knowing something happened a long time ago, and never understood why anybody would, so maybe I'm wrong - but I doubt anyone could give me a factual reason that I am.
Face it, 'M$' is immature and puerile and frankly, stupid. The fact that you have a skewed view of the popularity of the abbreviation doesn't change its basic childishness.
Showing them that it exists, and having them independently decide it would be possible absent any evidence are two completely different things. You've subtly changed the argument to make a point that was never in contention.
Ah, and so everybody at the time envisioned cell phones, for example? I posit (and use as evidence the "far future tech" of communicators in Star Trek) that they did not. Yet cell phones are the logical evolution of that telegraphed conversation.
Yes, everybody won. Except the copyright holders for the software you pirated. They lost their rights to profit from the distribution of their copyrighted software.
So yeah, I'll get my kneejerk under control as soon as you get your rationalizations to include rationality.
No one lost anything from my "piracy" because there was absolutely ZERO chance that I ever would have been able to buy any of the software or half of the magazines that I had available to me back then.
Your reasoning doesn't follow at all. You gained from your piracy, yes, but the copyright holder lost out on their right to profit from the distribution of the software. The fact that you see it as a net positive for yourself doesn't legitimize anything. Your greed for entertainment in no way trumps the rights of others.
Of course, I'll be modded down for pointing out the fact that piracy isn't right even though the pirate benefits. C'est la Slashdot.
It's exactly the same in principle, only the terms differ. Sharing freely doesn't mean "you can have this as long as you do what I want with it" it means "you can have this full stop"
The only difference between a GPL violation and infringement of copyright on a commercial movie is that people on Slashdot see the former as evil and disgusting and the latter as heroic. Both are the exact same violation of law.
While it's certainly fair that you use any criteria you want when judging value, your logic is completely illogical. Don't be too surprised that your opinion stands alone.
Slashdot Mirror
I find it excessively arrogant that you presume to speak for all geeks. I'm sure you're also a 20 percenter, since there is no clear majority of political thought.
I'm hoping for your sake this was a troll, because the alternative is you're retarded.
I've noticed you like to argue. Shame you do it so ineptly.
What about the 30 year olds who still live in their parent's basement, post anonymously on Slashdot, and rip into other people for the faults they see in themselves?
There wasn't a single technical reason in that post. There was a lot of speculation about market forces, but considering the economic stupidity I've seen around here, plus the fact that a large contingent of posters are socialist and hence understand the market about as well as I understand the feeling of childbirth, I'm going to have to say it's all pretty easy to dismiss.
I think Obama is the best available candidate as well, but for purely practical reasons. Republicans would stand in opposition to Hillary throughout her presidency on principle, Huckabee is a frightening and shallow bastard, McCain is insane and warmongering, and Romney believes in space jesus so he's pretty much out in my book. Obama wins by default. It doesn't hurt that he's likable, although it doesn't help that like all politicians, it's infuriatingly difficult to get a straight answer from him until his back is against the wall.
Oh, and Ron Paul. Yeah, like he'll even come close.
I guess you've never seen a locksmith open a house in about 3 seconds. Locks are false security.
Never underestimate the power of the headbutt.
I'm not entirely sure how the cessation of sexual activity is in society's interest.
They've also made significant capital investments that no one else has bothered making, and they sell a luxury item. If broadband access were a necessity, I could understand your case, but since it isn't, I don't.
(and in your world, the rest of the world must be pretty small because the US has most places shattered so far as internet access goes. A few socialist European countries and a few technology obsessed Asian countries have us beat. So? I fail to see the problem there.)
Just one question: why should you get to decide how much money the ISPs are allowed to make?
I'm about 95% sure you misunderstood the parent.
Compared to all the people living to today, American football is older. So age is actually nothing meaningful at all in this context.
Of course, I don't get a hard on for knowing something happened a long time ago, and never understood why anybody would, so maybe I'm wrong - but I doubt anyone could give me a factual reason that I am.
Nah, that's impossible. Only the US does bad things.
Face it, 'M$' is immature and puerile and frankly, stupid. The fact that you have a skewed view of the popularity of the abbreviation doesn't change its basic childishness.
Showing them that it exists, and having them independently decide it would be possible absent any evidence are two completely different things. You've subtly changed the argument to make a point that was never in contention.
Ah, and so everybody at the time envisioned cell phones, for example? I posit (and use as evidence the "far future tech" of communicators in Star Trek) that they did not. Yet cell phones are the logical evolution of that telegraphed conversation.
I submit, sir, that you are incorrect.
Yes, everybody won. Except the copyright holders for the software you pirated. They lost their rights to profit from the distribution of their copyrighted software.
So yeah, I'll get my kneejerk under control as soon as you get your rationalizations to include rationality.
I like some of it. The overall slimness is nice, since I like fitting more on the screen. But it needs some tweaking for sure.
No one lost anything from my "piracy" because there was absolutely ZERO chance that I ever would have been able to buy any of the software or half of the magazines that I had available to me back then.
Your reasoning doesn't follow at all. You gained from your piracy, yes, but the copyright holder lost out on their right to profit from the distribution of the software. The fact that you see it as a net positive for yourself doesn't legitimize anything. Your greed for entertainment in no way trumps the rights of others.
Of course, I'll be modded down for pointing out the fact that piracy isn't right even though the pirate benefits. C'est la Slashdot.
It beats "at the end of the day."
If I have to hear that ever again I'm likely to lose what little sanity I still possess.
It's exactly the same in principle, only the terms differ. Sharing freely doesn't mean "you can have this as long as you do what I want with it" it means "you can have this full stop"
The only difference between a GPL violation and infringement of copyright on a commercial movie is that people on Slashdot see the former as evil and disgusting and the latter as heroic. Both are the exact same violation of law.
For 95+% of the population, the freedoms Linux offers are worth approximately nothing.
While it's certainly fair that you use any criteria you want when judging value, your logic is completely illogical. Don't be too surprised that your opinion stands alone.
You appear to be emboldened by your puns.