Most of what the Linux Foundation works is not Linux. So why narrow the scope to something on the periphery of their activity?
I agree with the article's premise: The Linux Foundation is not a standards organization, it's a trade organization.
Re:say a word for PJ!
on
SCO Vs. Groklaw
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Quirk: She ardently enforces a policy of no cursing As she is not a lefty blogger, that is not a quirk. In fact, it's a quite common trait out in the real world.
Do not question the wisdom of Jimmy Wales! Wikipedia blew away all encyclopedias, and that is the end of the story! It is the ultimate in reference works, it is accurate, it is infallible, it is omnipresent, and if it weren't for a patent dispute with Microsoft, it would be omniscient as well!
We all know we've been screwed by the government, but if it can make its mantle of victimhood stick, we'll be fisted. I was thinking of buying a liter of vaseline, but after reading this story, I think a liter of novocaine would be more appropriate.
No, Christianity DOES take itself seriously. But it no longer tries to assert temporal power, in accordance with the words of Jesus. That was the medieval mindset it abandoned.
Sorry bud, but I was there at the time. I was one of the few booksellers at the time selling the book the in question. So my memory is clear. When asked if he supported the fatwa against Rushdie, Stevens said he considered the blasphemy a capital offense. IN CONTEXT it is clear what he meant. If that's not what he meant to say, he should have corrected himself the next day, and not wait several years later to do so.
What's the difference? Figure it out for yourselves:
-----
Martin Scorsese releases a film that was mildly heretical to Christianity. Some Christians stand around with placards protesting. Some boycott his movie. Most yawned and flip the newspaper to page two.
The very same year Salman Rushdie publishes a book that is mildly heretical to Islam. He received death threats and had to go into hiding. Noted peace activist turned Mulsim, Cat "Peace Train" Stevens, affirms that Rushdie should be killed. A fatwah was issued against booksellers (I was one) selling the tome. To this day, Rushdie remains in hiding.
-----
Over a decade later another movie was released that was mildly heretical to Christianity. A bunch of Christians boycotted it. A few sermons were preached from a few pulpits. That was it. Dale Brown and Tom Hanks made a lot of money.
Near the same time, a Danish newspaper publishes some cartoons, a few of which were mildly heretical to Islam. The Islamic world threw a shit fit, and engaged in violent protest for weeks. People died. Newpapers around the world tossed out principles held since the dawn of the Enlightenment and refused to print the cartoons.
-----
An opera that is planning to portray the severed heads of religious leaders is cancelled out of fear of violence... not because of the head of Jesus, but because of the head of Mohammed.
-----
Are you beginning to see the picture? Certainly Christianity has a checkered past, but it embraced the Enlightenment and Reformation. It has moved past its sins. But Islam remains rooted in a violent medieval mindset.
I used to think it was just a small group of fanatic extremist Muslims that were the problem. But then I started to realize that mainstream Islam was not condemning the fanatics. They were being awfully quiet. Where was the outcry from mainstream Islam over suicide bombings? Where was the outcry from mainstream Islam over Hamas and PLO thuggery? Where was the outcry from mainstream Islam over Wahabism? Over femail genital mutilation? Over "honor" killings? Over the torture and murder of homosexuals?
Western Civilization needs to STOP pretending that Islam is a religion of peace. It needs to stop sheltering Islam in the blanket of political correctness. It needs to stop pretending that the camel isn't in the tent. It needs to take a break from bashing Christianity and recognize where the real danger lies.
I can't get on an airplane with a four ounce tube of toothpaste, I have to take off my shoes walking through their detector, my laptop has to be xrayed outside of its case, and there's a huge sign saying "don't joke about bombs". So of COURSE a huge pile of electronics with a display that's giving you the finger would cause suspicion!
I've got another take on this, a suspicion that has been building every since the incident: the panic was deliberately planned by those two marketing creeps. Consider that these devices were in several other cities as well, and were there for weeks. But then Boston gets a whole slew of reports on them all in one single morning. I say those calls were made by those nimrods. I've heard stories that they were in Boston at the time of the panic, watching the panic, observing the police "dealing with" the devices, acting like "innocent" bystanders. Why didn't the say anything to stop the panic? Because they wanted the panic!
Just because Boston overreacted does not mean that Cartoon Network weren't idiots in hiring those two clowns for its marketing. They put up their devices on public structures without permission. At night under cover of darkness. They watched on site and DID NOTHING while Boston panicked. When they were caught, they acted like complete assholes. They might not have done anything illegal, but they definitely did something stupid.
The CEO resigned not because he's overreacting, but because he made a major mistake in hiring those bozos.
To put this in to perspective, if BayTSP were trying to bust me for doing drugs, it'd be like getting arrested because I was hanging out with some dealers, but they never saw me using, buying, or selling any drugs.
Not to defend BayTSP, but hanging out with drug dealers is bad mojo EVEN if you aren't doing drugs. Duh! The judge will eventually let you go, but not before the cops arrest you, bust your skull for resisting, and put you in a small cell with a large horny roommate. No amount of whining will make the situation fair. So get over it and stop hanging out with drug dealers.
Outside of tech forums, NO ONE knows what net neutrality really means. There has been NO debate on the issue, only snarky remarks from both sides. Thus it's irrelevant whether one side or the other is for or against it. It's like saying Democrats are raving war hawks just because they all voted for the Iraq invasion.
Open formats (as well as Free Software, etc.) have nothing whatsoever to do with red or blue states, liberals or conservatives, Republicans or Democrats. Stop trying to make this an us-vs-them issue.
While I love Free Software, and would encourage people to burn CDs of Free Software and hand them out to schools, neighbors, churches, etc., I am leery of a government getting behind this effort. The modus operandi of government is coercion, enforcement, mandates and dictates. But you can't coerce, enforce or mandate freedom. The minute you try it goes away.
Of course, "Free Software" is NOT liberty. It's a nice analogy, but it rapidly breaks down under scrutiny. Still, it's bizarre to see a government trying to encourage Free Software. Government is as much out of place encouraging Free Software as it is encouraging any philosophy or idea. The City of Paris would do a better job of promoting Free Software simply by getting out of its way. Let the free market of ideas work.
It is about time someone got a spine and said Linux is the only chance the open source movement has of winning.
You have just illustrated why Linux continues to languish in adoption by the general public. It isn't a kernel it's a freaking political ideology! Someone's choice of operating system shouldn't be about "winning". Someone isn't a "Microsoft employee" just because they chose a different OS than you.
I've never been able to overcome the aversion to a CDE look-alike.
Ditto. XFCE looks like ass. Maybe not as bad as the hairy pimplefest ass that was Sun's CDE. But even with the shave and baby oil it still looks like ass.
p.s. Now if they ever made a real desktop out of WindowMaker, I would be all over it like kraut on brots!
The Free Standards Group is now for Linux only? What a freaking joke! Is the Linux community so insecure that it needs to have exclusive standards? Is its self-esteem so low it cannot stand to share a file system hierarchy with BSD or Solaris? What a bunch of stupid lusers...
Slashdot Mirror
It's a sad sad day when Free Software desktops require proprietary video drivers. Somehow I think we made a wrong turn back there in Albuquerque.
Most of what the Linux Foundation works is not Linux. So why narrow the scope to something on the periphery of their activity?
I agree with the article's premise: The Linux Foundation is not a standards organization, it's a trade organization.
Quirk: She ardently enforces a policy of no cursing
As she is not a lefty blogger, that is not a quirk. In fact, it's a quite common trait out in the real world.
Do not question the wisdom of Jimmy Wales! Wikipedia blew away all encyclopedias, and that is the end of the story! It is the ultimate in reference works, it is accurate, it is infallible, it is omnipresent, and if it weren't for a patent dispute with Microsoft, it would be omniscient as well!
"Hate towards the government"?!?!
We all know we've been screwed by the government, but if it can make its mantle of victimhood stick, we'll be fisted. I was thinking of buying a liter of vaseline, but after reading this story, I think a liter of novocaine would be more appropriate.
In Europe the send them all to Brussels, then hand over sovereignty to the EU.
No, Christianity DOES take itself seriously. But it no longer tries to assert temporal power, in accordance with the words of Jesus. That was the medieval mindset it abandoned.
Sorry bud, but I was there at the time. I was one of the few booksellers at the time selling the book the in question. So my memory is clear. When asked if he supported the fatwa against Rushdie, Stevens said he considered the blasphemy a capital offense. IN CONTEXT it is clear what he meant. If that's not what he meant to say, he should have corrected himself the next day, and not wait several years later to do so.
What's the difference? Figure it out for yourselves:
-----
Martin Scorsese releases a film that was mildly heretical to Christianity. Some Christians stand around with placards protesting. Some boycott his movie. Most yawned and flip the newspaper to page two.
The very same year Salman Rushdie publishes a book that is mildly heretical to Islam. He received death threats and had to go into hiding. Noted peace activist turned Mulsim, Cat "Peace Train" Stevens, affirms that Rushdie should be killed. A fatwah was issued against booksellers (I was one) selling the tome. To this day, Rushdie remains in hiding.
-----
Over a decade later another movie was released that was mildly heretical to Christianity. A bunch of Christians boycotted it. A few sermons were preached from a few pulpits. That was it. Dale Brown and Tom Hanks made a lot of money.
Near the same time, a Danish newspaper publishes some cartoons, a few of which were mildly heretical to Islam. The Islamic world threw a shit fit, and engaged in violent protest for weeks. People died. Newpapers around the world tossed out principles held since the dawn of the Enlightenment and refused to print the cartoons.
-----
An opera that is planning to portray the severed heads of religious leaders is cancelled out of fear of violence... not because of the head of Jesus, but because of the head of Mohammed.
-----
Are you beginning to see the picture? Certainly Christianity has a checkered past, but it embraced the Enlightenment and Reformation. It has moved past its sins. But Islam remains rooted in a violent medieval mindset.
I used to think it was just a small group of fanatic extremist Muslims that were the problem. But then I started to realize that mainstream Islam was not condemning the fanatics. They were being awfully quiet. Where was the outcry from mainstream Islam over suicide bombings? Where was the outcry from mainstream Islam over Hamas and PLO thuggery? Where was the outcry from mainstream Islam over Wahabism? Over femail genital mutilation? Over "honor" killings? Over the torture and murder of homosexuals?
Western Civilization needs to STOP pretending that Islam is a religion of peace. It needs to stop sheltering Islam in the blanket of political correctness. It needs to stop pretending that the camel isn't in the tent. It needs to take a break from bashing Christianity and recognize where the real danger lies.
Richard Branson is offering $25M as a bounty for a fix to global warming.
Shut down Virgin Airlines and its carbon spewing planes!
I can't get on an airplane with a four ounce tube of toothpaste, I have to take off my shoes walking through their detector, my laptop has to be xrayed outside of its case, and there's a huge sign saying "don't joke about bombs". So of COURSE a huge pile of electronics with a display that's giving you the finger would cause suspicion!
Duh!
I've got another take on this, a suspicion that has been building every since the incident: the panic was deliberately planned by those two marketing creeps. Consider that these devices were in several other cities as well, and were there for weeks. But then Boston gets a whole slew of reports on them all in one single morning. I say those calls were made by those nimrods. I've heard stories that they were in Boston at the time of the panic, watching the panic, observing the police "dealing with" the devices, acting like "innocent" bystanders. Why didn't the say anything to stop the panic? Because they wanted the panic!
Just because Boston overreacted does not mean that Cartoon Network weren't idiots in hiring those two clowns for its marketing. They put up their devices on public structures without permission. At night under cover of darkness. They watched on site and DID NOTHING while Boston panicked. When they were caught, they acted like complete assholes. They might not have done anything illegal, but they definitely did something stupid.
The CEO resigned not because he's overreacting, but because he made a major mistake in hiring those bozos.
To put this in to perspective, if BayTSP were trying to bust me for doing drugs, it'd be like getting arrested because I was hanging out with some dealers, but they never saw me using, buying, or selling any drugs.
Not to defend BayTSP, but hanging out with drug dealers is bad mojo EVEN if you aren't doing drugs. Duh! The judge will eventually let you go, but not before the cops arrest you, bust your skull for resisting, and put you in a small cell with a large horny roommate. No amount of whining will make the situation fair. So get over it and stop hanging out with drug dealers.
Outside of tech forums, NO ONE knows what net neutrality really means. There has been NO debate on the issue, only snarky remarks from both sides. Thus it's irrelevant whether one side or the other is for or against it. It's like saying Democrats are raving war hawks just because they all voted for the Iraq invasion.
Open formats (as well as Free Software, etc.) have nothing whatsoever to do with red or blue states, liberals or conservatives, Republicans or Democrats. Stop trying to make this an us-vs-them issue.
p.s. Besides, Utah is much redder than Texas.
Besides, what do you mean free software is not Libre ?
I am free, the software is not. Freedom is for human beings. All you do when you apply it to software is to confuse the language.
While I love Free Software, and would encourage people to burn CDs of Free Software and hand them out to schools, neighbors, churches, etc., I am leery of a government getting behind this effort. The modus operandi of government is coercion, enforcement, mandates and dictates. But you can't coerce, enforce or mandate freedom. The minute you try it goes away.
Of course, "Free Software" is NOT liberty. It's a nice analogy, but it rapidly breaks down under scrutiny. Still, it's bizarre to see a government trying to encourage Free Software. Government is as much out of place encouraging Free Software as it is encouraging any philosophy or idea. The City of Paris would do a better job of promoting Free Software simply by getting out of its way. Let the free market of ideas work.
Dinosaurs had an evil exploitative capitalistic society? Who would have thunk it...
p.s. I would post more, but I'm recycling ascii characters in an effort to save the planet.
It is about time someone got a spine and said Linux is the only chance the open source movement has of winning.
You have just illustrated why Linux continues to languish in adoption by the general public. It isn't a kernel it's a freaking political ideology! Someone's choice of operating system shouldn't be about "winning". Someone isn't a "Microsoft employee" just because they chose a different OS than you.
I've never been able to overcome the aversion to a CDE look-alike.
Ditto. XFCE looks like ass. Maybe not as bad as the hairy pimplefest ass that was Sun's CDE. But even with the shave and baby oil it still looks like ass.
p.s. Now if they ever made a real desktop out of WindowMaker, I would be all over it like kraut on brots!
'enable death squads with their UUIDs'
If I were Microsoft I would be editing that entry too! Is this what counts as a Neutral Point of View for Wikipedians? Sheesh...
You could ask Jimmy Wales the same questions about why he told wikipedia admins to "correct" his biography.
Huh? Do you even know what "Free Software" means? Sheesh.
BIG CLUE STICK --> The BSD and MIT licenses are Free Software Licenses!
The Free Standards Group is now for Linux only? What a freaking joke! Is the Linux community so insecure that it needs to have exclusive standards? Is its self-esteem so low it cannot stand to share a file system hierarchy with BSD or Solaris? What a bunch of stupid lusers...