Why? If a long distance relationship works you already know you can trust your SO. My gf from HS and I stuck together through years of separation (as I got my degree), and are now happily married.
I think that a long distance relationship takes a bit more effort and a lot more trust then many want to expend. But if you can't trust each other while dating, why would you trust them married 20 years down the road? Maybe this explains the 50% divorce rate over here.
The place the product is produced being part of the name is a traditional thing. This is like trademarks we have today.
Kleenex is a trademark, only Kimberly Clark can call their product Kleenex. Only Champagne produced sparkling white wine should be called Champagne. Coke and cola, Skidoo and snowmobile, liquid paper and correction fluid, Post it Notes and whatever they actually are the list goes on.
It isn't like it is some huge leap of logic, just because the name of something has become so common that people may not even know the name of the real product.
And yes you can call your motor oil champagne, it likely isn't in the beverage category.
1. All GPL software is copyrighted by the author. It can't revert if it never left that state.
2. If a government declares my copyright invalid because they don't like my license they can't take away my ownership as punishment. Unless they make a law specifically stating such a process. Imagine if the gov just came and took all blue cars because they dont' like the colour. Doing this would be just as wrong.
Well who's money is it? The shareholders, and they don't care. Most shares are held by institutional investors, who don't vote or push issues with the board. Those fund and investment pools carry enough votes to run the company, but they don't.
Until we stop letting our money be mishandled like this it won't change.
Three articles no proof. Gasoline, Walmart states they don't sell below cost, othres accuse them of doing so. It is in court, but not proven. There is a claim their distribution costs is less. Note they say "below our cost" not below general market cost.
Toys, industry analyst says they sell 17 dollar barbies for 14 dollars, that is likely the market price, not the cost.
Teamsters against Walmart, isn't that obvious? Walmart is not unionized (yet)
Walmart doesn't sell at a loss. They sell with slim margins, they also get lower prices due to volume. Their selling price in some cases is even lower then other companies purchase price from the distributer.
Think about selling at a loss, first what do you gain. Secondly how do you explain to the owners that you lost money by selling below cost?
When the average American would rather buy made in China at Walmart, Made in America doesn't cut it.
When your 'Japanese' Car is made in Alabama, and your Chevy in Korea (the rebadged Dawoos), or Levis doesn't have a single US plant, the American brands kinda lose their appeal.
expressly regulates the use of electronic mail to send commercial messages
Just adjust the law to be any unsolicited unrequested mass emailing. Then it is not expressly targetting commercial messages, they just happen to be included. This would have the added benefit of getting rid of all those political solicitations that I don't want either.
The system didn't kill people, AIDS did. The system encouraged someone to research and provide a treatement that saved some lives.
The system isn't evil, it is just indifferent. Come up with a better system, aboloshing IP wouldn't have stopped those AIDS related deaths that WERE prevented (or delayed)
If SCO takes you to court for copyright infringement, they will have to show you the code.
Assuming they win against IBM, on copyright infringement, they still can't just grab someone and say "him too" without proving they own the copyright, and the defendant having the chance to prove they don't.
Come on, this is WHY it is cheap and effective to use offshore suppliers.
The reason that many countries are expensive is because they are safe and stable. The laws, workforce, international situation are all good, you are likely dealing with an expensive country. If you go to some country that has "political risk" the costs will be lower to account for this, everyone who does business with such a country must account for this risk.
If you want a safe stable place to do business keep it in a stable country, Don't put it in a semi independant nation/state mess on the other side of the world.
The investment has nothing to do with merits. If SCO wins this case other companies who are Linux dependant will get a HUGE loss. RBC has probaly invested in some of these companies. They gamble a small amount of money on SCO winning. This way they have less risk, SCO loses, their Linux investments payback - 50 million. The SCO case wins, they lose their Linux investments (or they are damaged) They get a windfall from SCO which partially offsets this loss.
Think of gambling on a sports games against two people. They will pay 3:1 that their team wins. Bet $2, $1 each, and no matter who wins, you are ahead $1. Welcome to hedging.
Slashdot Mirror
This is kind of annoying, if you have a successful product and marketting campaign, you lose it all.
Dumb dumb dumb
Why? If a long distance relationship works you already know you can trust your SO.
My gf from HS and I stuck together through years of separation (as I got my degree), and are now happily married.
I think that a long distance relationship takes a bit more effort and a lot more trust then many want to expend.
But if you can't trust each other while dating, why would you trust them married 20 years down the road?
Maybe this explains the 50% divorce rate over here.
The place the product is produced being part of the name is a traditional thing.
This is like trademarks we have today.
Kleenex is a trademark, only Kimberly Clark can call their product Kleenex.
Only Champagne produced sparkling white wine should be called Champagne.
Coke and cola, Skidoo and snowmobile, liquid paper and correction fluid, Post it Notes and whatever they actually are the list goes on.
It isn't like it is some huge leap of logic, just because the name of something has become so common that people may not even know the name of the real product.
And yes you can call your motor oil champagne, it likely isn't in the beverage category.
1. All GPL software is copyrighted by the author.
It can't revert if it never left that state.
2. If a government declares my copyright invalid because they don't like my license they can't take away my ownership as punishment. Unless they make a law specifically stating such a process. Imagine if the gov just came and took all blue cars because they dont' like the colour. Doing this would be just as wrong.
Then vote them down.
Say no until they put someone sane there.
Well who's money is it?
The shareholders, and they don't care.
Most shares are held by institutional investors, who don't vote or push issues with the board.
Those fund and investment pools carry enough votes to run the company, but they don't.
Until we stop letting our money be mishandled like this it won't change.
Protectionism only works short term.
It removes the incentive to really innovate and improve and compete.
If you aren't competative it is just wasteful to use your money that way.
If you can't compete on one product, make or do something else.
If you sit and try to force people to protect local sources, you'll get eaten up by Walmart, and those local sources die anyway.
They can't buy Debian.
Someone could make a new distribution, and not sell it.
For popular music, I listen to the radio, occasionally buy a CD.
Well I was a big fan of mp3.com, nicely categorized.
Now I'm using iuma.com, but it is a bit more of a mess any other sources?
Three articles no proof.
Gasoline, Walmart states they don't sell below cost, othres accuse them of doing so. It is in court, but not proven.
There is a claim their distribution costs is less.
Note they say "below our cost" not below general market cost.
Toys, industry analyst says they sell 17 dollar barbies for 14 dollars, that is likely the market price, not the cost.
Teamsters against Walmart, isn't that obvious? Walmart is not unionized (yet)
Walmart doesn't sell at a loss.
They sell with slim margins, they also get lower prices due to volume.
Their selling price in some cases is even lower then other companies purchase price from the distributer.
Think about selling at a loss, first what do you gain. Secondly how do you explain to the owners that you lost money by selling below cost?
They do tax it.
Until recently they were double taxing the same money (dividends).
When you and everyone else will pay more for locally produced goods then the Chinese crap at Walmart they'll change.
Resources are limited.
Properly controlling and allocating them does increase the value to society.
This is why the free market works.
Because I like geometry, and problem solving.
I like solving technical problems, and explaining the problem and solution.
So I'm a mechanical engineer, programming is my hobby. (dumbgame-0.7.tgz is released!!!)
When the average American would rather buy made in China at Walmart, Made in America doesn't cut it.
When your 'Japanese' Car is made in Alabama, and your Chevy in Korea (the rebadged Dawoos), or Levis doesn't have a single US plant, the American brands kinda lose their appeal.
Sorry, if your job can't be done efficiently the only thing a Union will do is sink the ENTIRE company or industry.
Unions can help protect the safety and working conditions, they aren't an answer when the workers just aren't competative.
2. Limits are required for it to be fair.
I don't think every offense needs to be overly harsh to be effective.
We don't chop off peoples hands for stealing anymore.
expressly regulates the use of electronic mail to send commercial messages
Just adjust the law to be any unsolicited unrequested mass emailing. Then it is not expressly targetting commercial messages, they just happen to be included.
This would have the added benefit of getting rid of all those political solicitations that I don't want either.
The system didn't kill people, AIDS did.
The system encouraged someone to research and provide a treatement that saved some lives.
The system isn't evil, it is just indifferent. Come up with a better system, aboloshing IP wouldn't have stopped those AIDS related deaths that WERE prevented (or delayed)
I wouldn't worry too much.
If SCO takes you to court for copyright infringement, they will have to show you the code.
Assuming they win against IBM, on copyright infringement, they still can't just grab someone and say "him too" without proving they own the copyright, and the defendant having the chance to prove they don't.
Just print it to postscript, then convert to pdf.
I do this for all sorts of documentation that I fear may not be around later (news story archives)
Easy, readable, electronic.
Come on, this is WHY it is cheap and effective to use offshore suppliers.
The reason that many countries are expensive is because they are safe and stable.
The laws, workforce, international situation are all good, you are likely dealing with an expensive country.
If you go to some country that has "political risk" the costs will be lower to account for this, everyone who does business with such a country must account for this risk.
If you want a safe stable place to do business keep it in a stable country, Don't put it in a semi independant nation/state mess on the other side of the world.
The other issue with the Quebec referendumb is the ambigious question.
The investment has nothing to do with merits.
If SCO wins this case other companies who are Linux dependant will get a HUGE loss.
RBC has probaly invested in some of these companies.
They gamble a small amount of money on SCO winning.
This way they have less risk, SCO loses, their Linux investments payback - 50 million.
The SCO case wins, they lose their Linux investments (or they are damaged) They get a windfall from SCO which partially offsets this loss.
Think of gambling on a sports games against two people.
They will pay 3:1 that their team wins.
Bet $2, $1 each, and no matter who wins, you are ahead $1. Welcome to hedging.