Intellectual property is just as imaginary as physical property. In both cases the government stops me from coming onto your property and shoving you off. In a purely natural world, I'd have the right to come in, shoot you, and suddenly have a nice plot of land.
However we WILLINGLY give up that right up to the government for the furthurence of society. Just like we WILLINGLY give up the right to be able to copy other people's ideas.
It's neither. It's a theory based on past evidence. It's a pretty well agreed upon theory.
That's what science lets us do: PREDICT. We can measure past events and past evidence and make logical assumptions about future occurances. This is NOT faith.
THe real answer is:
"Based on past experience, yes, I'm going to go under the assumption that the Sun will rise tomorrow. But it is not certain."
There's nothing keeping other people from stealing your physical property other than you and the GOVERNMENT. Just like IP. They are both "rights", which are invented and enforced for the general well being of society.
As a whole, we've agreed that having a police force to stop people from doing a whole host of things is a Good Idea. Copying bits is just one more.
God and science are very related. All claims about god have conflicted with science except for one: the origin of the universe. Science makes a living on addressing and narrowing the field of the unknown and it has done a pretty decent job. So what's left? One question. The origin of the universe.
Now examine two possible answers to that question:
a) we do not know. b) god made it.
a) introduces no assumptions. It requires no furthur explanation AT THIS TIME. It begs no questions. It is a question which will be answered in time, or forever unknown.
b) on the other hand begs many questions: who created God? Where does he live? What sort of intelligence is he? Is he within the universe or without? If he's without, what is he contained in? What are the boundaries of his existance? Insert infinite regress here.
b) requires many more assumptions than a) does. Seeing as we have no evidence either way, choosing b) vs choosing a) is an illogical position.
Quite simple we do not know what existed before the big bang. And we will continue to not know until we know.
This is directly contradictory to all the worlds major religions which postulate answers to b), and assert without justification that many things in our world are not explainable by science. Science says we do not work that way. We form a hypothesis and test it. We seek evidence. No wonder these people are mad about science: it IS incompatible with all but belief a).
Actually how about simply "do not watch it". Pirating is simply an excuse to have laws made that invade your privacy to discovery your piracy. It is not a morally appropiate option to disagreeing with a method of sale.
I'm the exact opposite. Windows Media streaming has worked great for me on Linux for a long while now, as long as DRM isn't at play. Flash however works not at all. 64 bit box.
Hmm. Actually, I'm complaining that the rest of you *DO* give a rats ass. Do in fact read the article, where people are MAD at other people for implementing OOXML.
OOXML is being implemented just fine. It's all the fuck tards that are calling these people 'evil' for doing so which are the problem.
My entire Office runs 2007 now. Within 2 months of release. I doubt we are alone. I think 99% is optimistic.
It is not an engineers job to destroy non metric screws. That's why we have Robertson, and a few dozen other kinds. Regardless what the screw standards body says, people do whatever they want anyways.
Samba has nothing to do with LDAP. You have your history wrong. Samba was original an SMB/CIFS implementation, which came around LONG before MS started to use Kerberos and LDAP. Windows 95 uses SMB. Windows 3.1 does. It has only been since Windows 2000 that Active Directory (that involves stuff like Kerberos and LDAP) has come onto the scene.
MS did not create a problem. MS created a solution. Called SMB. We can argue until we're blue in the face whether theres was teh first such thing around. I'm sure it wasn't. FTP was around. NFS was around. Both were unsuitable for the job.
Similarily, they created OOXML because ODF *SUCKS BALLS* to implement for MS Office type use cases. Definition of *SUCKS BALLS* varies depending who you are.
Ya know. This amazing stretch of analogies is a bit much.
MS has never punched me in the face. The most they have done is offered a shitty piece of software which I've decided not to use... and maybe gone out of their way a few times to undermine other people's software by selling their stuff lower.
None of this rises to the level of physical or emotional abuse. Unless you're a pansy or previously emotionally unstable, anyways.
You must have been replying to a post other than the one I sent!
Not only do I not live in a delusional fantasy world, I appreciate the.doc format support! Is it perfect? No! Does it give me a blowjob? No! Is it better than nothing? Yes! You seem to think I care that it works perfectly. I do care, but not that much. It works better than nothing!
>>>So if you want "awesome software that is easy to modify that I don't have to pay for", but you want compatibility with proprietary formats, you can't have it. It's that simple. I'm not an asshole for simply telling you the truth.
I have it, right now. I do not have perfect compatibility. I have better than nothing. Please do not raise strawmen. I never claimed I wanted perfect.
Gnome is endorsing OOXML? Last I checked nobody from Gnome has issued an official statement of any sort. As far as I can tell, they are purposely SHUTTING THE FUCK UP. Why do they need to toot a trumpet? And yes, I'm sure most of the Gnome people want to provide support for OOXML in their software. I'd sure like them to.
Doing where? Last I checked free software was not some exclusive club of people who had the same societal ideals. Mine is to use awesome software that is easy to modify that I don't have to pay for. Technically enjoyable. Am I not allowed to be here if I don't have some grande vision of society?
And yes. I can use free software to read.doc files Good Enough. I will be able to do the same with OOXML, just as well or better. Binary parts? Whatever. GOOD ENOUGH.
I'm not complaining. In fact last I checked I'm the one person here NOT complaining! I'm actually quite satisfied with the status quo! I'm only complaining about you rightous assholes who think you have the authority to tell me what I can and cannot work on. Ya'll are the ones complaining that some guys are going off on their own and working on stuff YOU don't approve of. Fuck off, asshole, don't tell me what I can and cannot do.
I don't really care what YOU want ME to do. Maybe you should go do something on your own? Until then, I will contribute to things *I* want to contribute to, your opinions be damned.
In fact it galls me that you think you are in some sort of position to dictate to me what I'm allowed to work on. Fuck off, asshole.
This may in fact be accurate. If in fact we were talking about school yard bullies beating you up. In fact we are not.
Come up with an analogy that describes the nuances of the situation. Let me put it this way. Just because YOU feel like you are being beat up on the playground by MS, does not make me feel the same way. I do not feel that way. I have not been beat up. I have no bruises. MS is not out to get me. And hence I will contribute to reading OOXML.
There is no anger here. It is a simple pragmatic decision to Get Work Done.
There is no "us" and there is no "our" nor "we". There are a lose collection of individuals writing software. Some of those people want to use OOXML. Buzz off.
a) I do not care about the ISO. They are not god. They do not control what software I support. b) There is no "us". There is no "we". There are a loose collection of individuals doing WHATEVER THE FUCK THEY WANT. Which includes implementing OOXML. c) The mission is not to beat MS. At least my mission. My mission is to have software to be enjoyable for me. Software which cannot read documents people send me is not enjoyable.
Prevent what from happening? As far as I can tell Office 2007 is already released. Also, as far as I can tell, the mission isn't to prevent anything from happening. It's to make our software read everything without barriers.
Where did you come up with the idea that it was somehow the mission of every open source or free software advocate to destroy any and all ideas that are not ours? It's not. Hence why things like Samba exist. Why are you forcing this on us?
We have a great standard. It is ODF. The effort to get OOXML working on free software is seperate from this.
Gosh. You guys are a bunch of angry morons. Life isn't about taking your ball and going home. It's about doing deals to gently move the status quo over to your side. Taking your ball and going home isn't going to actually SOLVE anything.
It is a sucky standard. Who cares? Not me. I'd sure rather it work than everybody cry about it.
Actually I quite like my code. It's usually well structured, well commented, built on sound principals. I usually abstract it one more step than required so as to adapt it to changing business needs. I have great conventions about organization, case, functionality. It's completely source controlled. Planned features. Loosely coupled.
What the hell is your problem? Are you just lazy or something? Shut up and write better code?
in apple's case, it was probably more profitable to ignore it on the off chance they would get away with it. in linux' cases it's common sense to never look at patents ever in case you might accidently get polluted.
prgamatic entities make decisions in grey areas all day long.
Geeze. What a completely morally bankrupt loser. Did you not consider "not buying/pirating music" way up front during the Napster days? Of course not. To you it's simply about getting what you want. You'll either take it or buy it, which ever is easier... but that doesn't change the fact that you're a leech without ethics.
Slashdot Mirror
Intellectual property is just as imaginary as physical property. In both cases the government stops me from coming onto your property and shoving you off. In a purely natural world, I'd have the right to come in, shoot you, and suddenly have a nice plot of land.
However we WILLINGLY give up that right up to the government for the furthurence of society. Just like we WILLINGLY give up the right to be able to copy other people's ideas.
Some of us in fact DO agree with IP.
It's neither. It's a theory based on past evidence. It's a pretty well agreed upon theory.
That's what science lets us do: PREDICT. We can measure past events and past evidence and make logical assumptions about future occurances. This is NOT faith.
THe real answer is:
"Based on past experience, yes, I'm going to go under the assumption that the Sun will rise tomorrow. But it is not certain."
You're right. Those people are not at fault. But neither is MS. Issue is over. Nobody is at fault, nobody should be compelled to do anything.
There's nothing keeping other people from stealing your physical property other than you and the GOVERNMENT. Just like IP. They are both "rights", which are invented and enforced for the general well being of society.
As a whole, we've agreed that having a police force to stop people from doing a whole host of things is a Good Idea. Copying bits is just one more.
God and science are very related. All claims about god have conflicted with science except for one: the origin of the universe. Science makes a living on addressing and narrowing the field of the unknown and it has done a pretty decent job. So what's left? One question. The origin of the universe.
Now examine two possible answers to that question:
a) we do not know.
b) god made it.
a) introduces no assumptions. It requires no furthur explanation AT THIS TIME. It begs no questions. It is a question which will be answered in time, or forever unknown.
b) on the other hand begs many questions: who created God? Where does he live? What sort of intelligence is he? Is he within the universe or without? If he's without, what is he contained in? What are the boundaries of his existance? Insert infinite regress here.
b) requires many more assumptions than a) does. Seeing as we have no evidence either way, choosing b) vs choosing a) is an illogical position.
Quite simple we do not know what existed before the big bang. And we will continue to not know until we know.
This is directly contradictory to all the worlds major religions which postulate answers to b), and assert without justification that many things in our world are not explainable by science. Science says we do not work that way. We form a hypothesis and test it. We seek evidence. No wonder these people are mad about science: it IS incompatible with all but belief a).
Actually how about simply "do not watch it". Pirating is simply an excuse to have laws made that invade your privacy to discovery your piracy. It is not a morally appropiate option to disagreeing with a method of sale.
I'm the exact opposite. Windows Media streaming has worked great for me on Linux for a long while now, as long as DRM isn't at play. Flash however works not at all. 64 bit box.
Hmm. Actually, I'm complaining that the rest of you *DO* give a rats ass. Do in fact read the article, where people are MAD at other people for implementing OOXML.
OOXML is being implemented just fine. It's all the fuck tards that are calling these people 'evil' for doing so which are the problem.
Alright. One by one. Because I was bated.
My entire Office runs 2007 now. Within 2 months of release. I doubt we are alone. I think 99% is optimistic.
It is not an engineers job to destroy non metric screws. That's why we have Robertson, and a few dozen other kinds. Regardless what the screw standards body says, people do whatever they want anyways.
Samba has nothing to do with LDAP. You have your history wrong. Samba was original an SMB/CIFS implementation, which came around LONG before MS started to use Kerberos and LDAP. Windows 95 uses SMB. Windows 3.1 does. It has only been since Windows 2000 that Active Directory (that involves stuff like Kerberos and LDAP) has come onto the scene.
MS did not create a problem. MS created a solution. Called SMB. We can argue until we're blue in the face whether theres was teh first such thing around. I'm sure it wasn't. FTP was around. NFS was around. Both were unsuitable for the job.
Similarily, they created OOXML because ODF *SUCKS BALLS* to implement for MS Office type use cases. Definition of *SUCKS BALLS* varies depending who you are.
Um. You realize Ubuntu's "truely user-friendly interface" is pretty much just upstream Gnome, right? Hence their success is in fact because on Gnome.
Ya know. This amazing stretch of analogies is a bit much.
MS has never punched me in the face. The most they have done is offered a shitty piece of software which I've decided not to use... and maybe gone out of their way a few times to undermine other people's software by selling their stuff lower.
None of this rises to the level of physical or emotional abuse. Unless you're a pansy or previously emotionally unstable, anyways.
You must have been replying to a post other than the one I sent!
.doc format support! Is it perfect? No! Does it give me a blowjob? No! Is it better than nothing? Yes! You seem to think I care that it works perfectly. I do care, but not that much. It works better than nothing!
Not only do I not live in a delusional fantasy world, I appreciate the
>>>So if you want "awesome software that is easy to modify that I don't have to pay for", but you want compatibility with proprietary formats, you can't have it. It's that simple. I'm not an asshole for simply telling you the truth.
I have it, right now. I do not have perfect compatibility. I have better than nothing. Please do not raise strawmen. I never claimed I wanted perfect.
Gnome is endorsing OOXML? Last I checked nobody from Gnome has issued an official statement of any sort. As far as I can tell, they are purposely SHUTTING THE FUCK UP. Why do they need to toot a trumpet? And yes, I'm sure most of the Gnome people want to provide support for OOXML in their software. I'd sure like them to.
It's because he's pragmatic. You know, not religious. Not a fundamentalist crazy-person.
I like Mono. It lets me write C# on Linux. Does it hurt you? Apparently it must, how I have no idea.
I want to open OOXML documents. Does this hurt you? Got me. You seem to think it does.
Does this have anything to do with anything? I couldn't find it. Sure. ODF is great. Rah rah. Point?
Doing where? Last I checked free software was not some exclusive club of people who had the same societal ideals. Mine is to use awesome software that is easy to modify that I don't have to pay for. Technically enjoyable. Am I not allowed to be here if I don't have some grande vision of society?
.doc files Good Enough. I will be able to do the same with OOXML, just as well or better. Binary parts? Whatever. GOOD ENOUGH.
And yes. I can use free software to read
I'm not complaining. In fact last I checked I'm the one person here NOT complaining! I'm actually quite satisfied with the status quo! I'm only complaining about you rightous assholes who think you have the authority to tell me what I can and cannot work on. Ya'll are the ones complaining that some guys are going off on their own and working on stuff YOU don't approve of. Fuck off, asshole, don't tell me what I can and cannot do.
I don't really care what YOU want ME to do. Maybe you should go do something on your own? Until then, I will contribute to things *I* want to contribute to, your opinions be damned.
In fact it galls me that you think you are in some sort of position to dictate to me what I'm allowed to work on. Fuck off, asshole.
This may in fact be accurate. If in fact we were talking about school yard bullies beating you up. In fact we are not.
Come up with an analogy that describes the nuances of the situation. Let me put it this way. Just because YOU feel like you are being beat up on the playground by MS, does not make me feel the same way. I do not feel that way. I have not been beat up. I have no bruises. MS is not out to get me. And hence I will contribute to reading OOXML.
There is no anger here. It is a simple pragmatic decision to Get Work Done.
There is no "us" and there is no "our" nor "we". There are a lose collection of individuals writing software. Some of those people want to use OOXML. Buzz off.
a) I do not care about the ISO. They are not god. They do not control what software I support.
b) There is no "us". There is no "we". There are a loose collection of individuals doing WHATEVER THE FUCK THEY WANT. Which includes implementing OOXML.
c) The mission is not to beat MS. At least my mission. My mission is to have software to be enjoyable for me. Software which cannot read documents people send me is not enjoyable.
Prevent what from happening? As far as I can tell Office 2007 is already released. Also, as far as I can tell, the mission isn't to prevent anything from happening. It's to make our software read everything without barriers. Where did you come up with the idea that it was somehow the mission of every open source or free software advocate to destroy any and all ideas that are not ours? It's not. Hence why things like Samba exist. Why are you forcing this on us? We have a great standard. It is ODF. The effort to get OOXML working on free software is seperate from this.
Gosh. You guys are a bunch of angry morons. Life isn't about taking your ball and going home. It's about doing deals to gently move the status quo over to your side. Taking your ball and going home isn't going to actually SOLVE anything.
It is a sucky standard. Who cares? Not me. I'd sure rather it work than everybody cry about it.
Actually I quite like my code. It's usually well structured, well commented, built on sound principals. I usually abstract it one more step than required so as to adapt it to changing business needs. I have great conventions about organization, case, functionality. It's completely source controlled. Planned features. Loosely coupled.
What the hell is your problem? Are you just lazy or something? Shut up and write better code?
define common sense.
in apple's case, it was probably more profitable to ignore it on the off chance they would get away with it. in linux' cases it's common sense to never look at patents ever in case you might accidently get polluted.
prgamatic entities make decisions in grey areas all day long.
Local bars and concerts. Duh.
Geeze. What a completely morally bankrupt loser. Did you not consider "not buying/pirating music" way up front during the Napster days? Of course not. To you it's simply about getting what you want. You'll either take it or buy it, which ever is easier... but that doesn't change the fact that you're a leech without ethics.