the question really should be, then, why are peoples' imaginations suffering? why aren't we coming up with new ideas for science fiction - anyone who ever says that the world is out of ideas could use a nice kick in the hiney.
would there be any way to clearly indicate that a CD was not selling because of a boycot on its copyprotection, rather than simply because it's not a good CD (or not commercially successful, etc)?
no.. i'm not saying anything. i'm saying that _he_ said that windows may come out ahead because they have a more concrete and better plan of action presented, that he doesn't see as possible given the linux development and installation environment.
but, really, his point is that windows has more potential for security, if they go through the four steps he listed. his question was, can linux really do likewise?
where is the commercial interest going to come from? if it were going to come, wouldn't it have? am i wrong, or is the reason that the government is doing that no one else reallly wants to? (i _could_ be wrong mind you:)
good points...
i have to wonder about the unity though. what i mean is, unless everyone who can do so holds back the service, then the people who need these services will simply have to go elsewhere to find them. it's less trouble than becoming aware of what's going on.
i don't think consumer is all that offensive - i consume, and i also produce. but that's besides the point...
i feel that by doing this sort of protest, there's the danger of irritating people more than making them aware - it could be interpreted by many as a temper tantrum, especially if the reason for the protest is not made 100% clear....
very nice idea, but i think that they should be paid the same thing whether they reject or accept a patent - otherwise you might have more rejections than is correct. they should get paid the same no matter what, so it's a pure valute judgment...
i don't know if it's been covered elsewhere, but a lot of companies (i know Intel does this) would rather just keep a technology/algorithm internal than patent it - because they've found that software patents are incredibly hard to enforce.
like the other poster said... the strikes worked because they withheld something the companies wanted - work.
if you shut down your website, you aren't withholding anything from the people making the laws (unless by chance). you're _just_ hurting the innocent consumers.
it's almost like all bakeries refusing to sell cake because they don't like the speed limits.
Slashdot Mirror
the question really should be, then, why are peoples' imaginations suffering? why aren't we coming up with new ideas for science fiction - anyone who ever says that the world is out of ideas could use a nice kick in the hiney.
would there be any way to clearly indicate that a CD was not selling because of a boycot on its copyprotection, rather than simply because it's not a good CD (or not commercially successful, etc)?
no.. i'm not saying anything. i'm saying that _he_ said that windows may come out ahead because they have a more concrete and better plan of action presented, that he doesn't see as possible given the linux development and installation environment.
uh, some people prefer the added emphasis of using _underscores_ rather than italics in some situations... :)
but, really, his point is that windows has more potential for security, if they go through the four steps he listed. his question was, can linux really do likewise?
where is the commercial interest going to come from? if it were going to come, wouldn't it have? am i wrong, or is the reason that the government is doing that no one else reallly wants to? (i _could_ be wrong mind you :)
i have to wonder about the unity though. what i mean is, unless everyone who can do so holds back the service, then the people who need these services will simply have to go elsewhere to find them. it's less trouble than becoming aware of what's going on.
i don't think consumer is all that offensive - i consume, and i also produce. but that's besides the point...
i feel that by doing this sort of protest, there's the danger of irritating people more than making them aware - it could be interpreted by many as a temper tantrum, especially if the reason for the protest is not made 100% clear....
i think it's a tough issue :)
very nice idea, but i think that they should be paid the same thing whether they reject or accept a patent - otherwise you might have more rejections than is correct. they should get paid the same no matter what, so it's a pure valute judgment...
i don't know if it's been covered elsewhere, but a lot of companies (i know Intel does this) would rather just keep a technology/algorithm internal than patent it - because they've found that software patents are incredibly hard to enforce.
like the other poster said... the strikes worked because they withheld something the companies wanted - work. if you shut down your website, you aren't withholding anything from the people making the laws (unless by chance). you're _just_ hurting the innocent consumers. it's almost like all bakeries refusing to sell cake because they don't like the speed limits.