YOU have to read the entire article. The Slashdot title and summary is deliberately biased. This guy was an aide of a Montana congressmen. I don't want to poke fun at Montana, but he's a small fry of a small fry.
Unless your claim is that Democrats never do anything stupid, his political affiliation is ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT.
On the other hand, he appointed Condaleeza Rice. Probably the most smartest and most educated woman in poltical office this decade. Roberts is brilliant. He may not share your politics, but that doesn't detract from his qualifications. And from what I hear on the grapevine, Karl Rove is a genius. Evil genius, but a genius nonetheless.
So sometimes the B students do hire A people. Thank goodness, because the last A student we had was Carter. And he's not exactly known for the quality of his appointments either.
How to bias a story summary. Let's say you don't like Republicans, and want to bias a story against them. So instead of writing "congressional aide", you write "Republican Aide". Instead of writing "the communications director for a congressman", you write "Republican Communications Director".
You're still being accurate, of course, but that doesn't change the fact that you have just deliberately editorialized and biased the reporting.
Reading the original story, you don't even see the word "Republican. All you see is an "R" after the congressman's name. But it's NOT the congressmen who is the subject of the story, it's one of his aides. Soem people do stupid, unethical and immoral things. Sometimes these people are Republicans, sometimes they are Democrats. But their political affiliations are irrelevant to their misconduct.
MS is now free to sue anybody that USES linux and novell will not come to their aid.
That does not follow. Microsoft can sue Redhat users anyway, regardless of any deal they have with Novell. This is still analogous to a Mafia protection racket. If Bob's Flower Shop down the street doesn't pay his "insurance", Vito is going to break his kneecaps. It doesn't matter if you pay *your* insurance or not, Vito is STILL going to break Bob's kneecaps.
Novell's actions do not in any way affect Microsoft's relationship to other distros or their users.
The point is that Novell has now been taken away as a threat to MS for the next five years.
I think that might be the answer I'm looking for. I'm a FreeBSD user, and so don't think like a Linux user, so pardon me if I get this wrong. It seems to me that what you are saying is: "The defeat of Microsoft is the primary goal, so Novell's sin is that they are no longer threatening Microsoft. They are is in essence and aiding and abetting the enemy, and deserting in a time of war." Does that sum it up?
So? Back to my post, why does that make them backstabbing traitors instead of merely testicularly challenged cowards?
The GPL doesn't allow this, it has the 'live free or die' clause.
I am not finding this 'live free or die' clause. Not even in spirit. Please point it out to me.
There's a saying, we must all hang together, for if we do not, we shall assuredly hang separately.
Please dispense with the hyperbole. That's the core of my problem with this issue, that everyone is getting blowing it completely out of proportion. No one is going to hang! Sheesh.
Besides, Microsoft didn't need to enter into a deal with Novell in order to sue Redhat users. If Microsoft wants to sue Redhat users, it's going to do so regardless of any agreements it has with Novell. While the deal may be a terribly bad decision for Novell, it's completely irrelevent to users of other systems.
The difference between a Flash and any of the other formats, is that I don't need a specific player, all I need is the codec. I can play Mpeg4 with MPlayer, Xine, etc., as well as browser plugins based on those. With Flash I am limited to one single Adobe supplied player that is NOT supported on my platform.
I would prefer that the formats not be proprietary. But if I can't get that, my next preference is a proprietary format that doesn't make me reboot into another operating system to use. Any website that demands that of me is a website I will not visit. Period.
p.s. And don't give me any crap about Flash being available for Linux. I'm not running Linux. But even if I did, I would still have to launch a browser separate from the one I use, then have to cope with the crashfest beta version of Flash many videos require. It's simply not worth it. It's not the proprietary-ness of the format that bugs the shit out of me, it's the requirement to use specific operating systems and browsers.
p.p.s. For the last six years years I have been happily viewing online videos in a variety of formats. Now suddenly in the last six months nearly all online videos have switched to Flash. More credulous men than I would be screaming "conspiracy!"
Some please explain the controversy over the MS/Novell deal to me. It seems that in everyone's rush to bemoan the fate of all mankind, the actual specifics of the problem have been lost. So after several weeks of trying to sort it out, I now humbly ask clarification. No snarky comments please, I'm being serious.
My understanding is that this is an indemnity deal. Microsoft says it won't sue Novell over patents. While this may be interpreted as a statement of intent to sue non-Novell distros, that still doesn't explain attitude towards Novell. Shouldn't they be considered equivalent to shopkeepers who knuckle under and pay protection fees to the mob? At most they should be treated as cowards, and not as traitors who have sold out the future of Linux.
And what's the big deal with the GPL? I've turned it upside down and inside out, and I can find no restriction against entering into indemnity deals. Not even in spirit. Microsoft may not sue Novell if it incorporates patented code into GPL sources, but the GPL licensors certainly will! So again, what's the problem?
I'm coming to the conclusion that this is merely MDS. Microsoft Derangement Syndrome. It's the mere mention of the name "Microsoft" that has everyone foaming at the mouth. I greatly suspect that if the exact same deal had been made with IBM (who owns more patents than Microsoft ever will) no one would even be batting an eye. It's for these reason I've not asked this question before, out of dread that I would be flamed to oblivion. So please take a step back, count to ten, and calmy explain why Novell is so evil for entering into this agreement.
Actually, we pretty much do have human rights figured out. The two snag are: 1) governments that prevent their exercise; and 2) citizens that keep confusing rights with wants and privileges.
Once robots attain the ability of self-determination, they'll suddenly gain rights. It's at that point where we (as voters in a democratic government) have to decide whether or not we prevent them from exercising those rights.
People say "steal" because it is one syllable, as opposed to the six for "violate copyright". No, it's not synonymous with armed robbery, but it is stealing. Get a dictionary and look it up! If copyright is a property, then copyright violation can indeed be stealing. If copyright isn't a property, then stop according property rights to your creative works (such as using the GPL).
Last week I went to a wedding. While there I stole a kiss from the bride. So why can I steal a kiss but I can't steal a poem?
Industry? What industry? While non-technical Windows-only office secretaries may count as a special interest group, they are not an "industry". Do a survey of documentation professionals, and you'll find that MSWord isn't their industry's standard.
I'm starting to get tired of the "Bush==Dumb" meme. You repeat a joke long enough, and the idiots on Comedy Central start to believe it's true. The lack of a 4.0 GPA and Ivy League diction is irrelevant to intelligence. The truth is that NO ONE who manages to become president is dumb.
Precisely. I've chosen an OS and browser which Adobe/Macromedia deliberately refuse to support. But I'm not sending histrionic rants to YouTube because I can't see any of their crappy videos.
If websites don't want me to visit them, I won't visit them. Simple. And I have lower blood pressure as a result.
Slashdot Mirror
At least it was a blister and not a boil!
Phew! I'm glad it's the Linux bubble that has burst, because GNOME and KDE are AWESOME on FreeBSD!
YOU have to read the entire article. The Slashdot title and summary is deliberately biased. This guy was an aide of a Montana congressmen. I don't want to poke fun at Montana, but he's a small fry of a small fry.
Unless your claim is that Democrats never do anything stupid, his political affiliation is ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT.
On the other hand, he appointed Condaleeza Rice. Probably the most smartest and most educated woman in poltical office this decade. Roberts is brilliant. He may not share your politics, but that doesn't detract from his qualifications. And from what I hear on the grapevine, Karl Rove is a genius. Evil genius, but a genius nonetheless.
So sometimes the B students do hire A people. Thank goodness, because the last A student we had was Carter. And he's not exactly known for the quality of his appointments either.
How to bias a story summary. Let's say you don't like Republicans, and want to bias a story against them. So instead of writing "congressional aide", you write "Republican Aide". Instead of writing "the communications director for a congressman", you write "Republican Communications Director".
You're still being accurate, of course, but that doesn't change the fact that you have just deliberately editorialized and biased the reporting.
Reading the original story, you don't even see the word "Republican. All you see is an "R" after the congressman's name. But it's NOT the congressmen who is the subject of the story, it's one of his aides. Soem people do stupid, unethical and immoral things. Sometimes these people are Republicans, sometimes they are Democrats. But their political affiliations are irrelevant to their misconduct.
MS is now free to sue anybody that USES linux and novell will not come to their aid.
That does not follow. Microsoft can sue Redhat users anyway, regardless of any deal they have with Novell. This is still analogous to a Mafia protection racket. If Bob's Flower Shop down the street doesn't pay his "insurance", Vito is going to break his kneecaps. It doesn't matter if you pay *your* insurance or not, Vito is STILL going to break Bob's kneecaps.
Novell's actions do not in any way affect Microsoft's relationship to other distros or their users.
The point is that Novell has now been taken away as a threat to MS for the next five years.
I think that might be the answer I'm looking for. I'm a FreeBSD user, and so don't think like a Linux user, so pardon me if I get this wrong. It seems to me that what you are saying is: "The defeat of Microsoft is the primary goal, so Novell's sin is that they are no longer threatening Microsoft. They are is in essence and aiding and abetting the enemy, and deserting in a time of war." Does that sum it up?
they've cut a separate peace with MS
So? Back to my post, why does that make them backstabbing traitors instead of merely testicularly challenged cowards?
The GPL doesn't allow this, it has the 'live free or die' clause.
I am not finding this 'live free or die' clause. Not even in spirit. Please point it out to me.
There's a saying, we must all hang together, for if we do not, we shall assuredly hang separately.
Please dispense with the hyperbole. That's the core of my problem with this issue, that everyone is getting blowing it completely out of proportion. No one is going to hang! Sheesh.
Besides, Microsoft didn't need to enter into a deal with Novell in order to sue Redhat users. If Microsoft wants to sue Redhat users, it's going to do so regardless of any agreements it has with Novell. While the deal may be a terribly bad decision for Novell, it's completely irrelevent to users of other systems.
A website's hit rate is not justification enough for me to reboot into a different OS so I can watch a video.
People don't complain because they don't know there is a way out.
Precisely. Ad blockers are fairly popular among those in the know. If Tonsumers don't want static ads, think how much less they want animated ads.
I shouldn't have to buy a Wii just to watch a crappy online video.
The difference between a Flash and any of the other formats, is that I don't need a specific player, all I need is the codec. I can play Mpeg4 with MPlayer, Xine, etc., as well as browser plugins based on those. With Flash I am limited to one single Adobe supplied player that is NOT supported on my platform.
I would prefer that the formats not be proprietary. But if I can't get that, my next preference is a proprietary format that doesn't make me reboot into another operating system to use. Any website that demands that of me is a website I will not visit. Period.
p.s. And don't give me any crap about Flash being available for Linux. I'm not running Linux. But even if I did, I would still have to launch a browser separate from the one I use, then have to cope with the crashfest beta version of Flash many videos require. It's simply not worth it. It's not the proprietary-ness of the format that bugs the shit out of me, it's the requirement to use specific operating systems and browsers.
p.p.s. For the last six years years I have been happily viewing online videos in a variety of formats. Now suddenly in the last six months nearly all online videos have switched to Flash. More credulous men than I would be screaming "conspiracy!"
Some please explain the controversy over the MS/Novell deal to me. It seems that in everyone's rush to bemoan the fate of all mankind, the actual specifics of the problem have been lost. So after several weeks of trying to sort it out, I now humbly ask clarification. No snarky comments please, I'm being serious.
My understanding is that this is an indemnity deal. Microsoft says it won't sue Novell over patents. While this may be interpreted as a statement of intent to sue non-Novell distros, that still doesn't explain attitude towards Novell. Shouldn't they be considered equivalent to shopkeepers who knuckle under and pay protection fees to the mob? At most they should be treated as cowards, and not as traitors who have sold out the future of Linux.
And what's the big deal with the GPL? I've turned it upside down and inside out, and I can find no restriction against entering into indemnity deals. Not even in spirit. Microsoft may not sue Novell if it incorporates patented code into GPL sources, but the GPL licensors certainly will! So again, what's the problem?
I'm coming to the conclusion that this is merely MDS. Microsoft Derangement Syndrome. It's the mere mention of the name "Microsoft" that has everyone foaming at the mouth. I greatly suspect that if the exact same deal had been made with IBM (who owns more patents than Microsoft ever will) no one would even be batting an eye. It's for these reason I've not asked this question before, out of dread that I would be flamed to oblivion. So please take a step back, count to ten, and calmy explain why Novell is so evil for entering into this agreement.
Yet another website that destroys perfectly playable videos by wrapping them in crappy proprietary Flash.
Actually, we pretty much do have human rights figured out. The two snag are: 1) governments that prevent their exercise; and 2) citizens that keep confusing rights with wants and privileges.
Once robots attain the ability of self-determination, they'll suddenly gain rights. It's at that point where we (as voters in a democratic government) have to decide whether or not we prevent them from exercising those rights.
Google madly searching for a way to generate revenue before their stockholders regain consciousness...
Bah! Next thing you know, they'll want the right to marry. As if domestic robo-partnerships isn't good enough...
T.S. Elliot was a master of words far beyond what you or I ever will be. Thus I defer to his greatness.
People say "steal" because it is one syllable, as opposed to the six for "violate copyright". No, it's not synonymous with armed robbery, but it is stealing. Get a dictionary and look it up! If copyright is a property, then copyright violation can indeed be stealing. If copyright isn't a property, then stop according property rights to your creative works (such as using the GPL).
Last week I went to a wedding. While there I stole a kiss from the bride. So why can I steal a kiss but I can't steal a poem?
I for one, am praising T.S. Eliot!
Industry? What industry? While non-technical Windows-only office secretaries may count as a special interest group, they are not an "industry". Do a survey of documentation professionals, and you'll find that MSWord isn't their industry's standard.
Maybe because it's supposed to represent black ink on white paper?
I see this got modded down. Offtopic I could understand, but not overrated. Sheesh.
We need a moderation category: "-1, Moderator Offended"
Though I still wonder: If it is not meant to replace HFS+, could there be any other reasons to support ZFS?
Of course there is! How about simply supporting ZFS?
Yawn. When you're done with the Karl Rove is Dr. Evil routine, come back and we'll talk, Until then stay at least fifty yards away from me.
I'm starting to get tired of the "Bush==Dumb" meme. You repeat a joke long enough, and the idiots on Comedy Central start to believe it's true. The lack of a 4.0 GPA and Ivy League diction is irrelevant to intelligence. The truth is that NO ONE who manages to become president is dumb.
Get a life.
Precisely. I've chosen an OS and browser which Adobe/Macromedia deliberately refuse to support. But I'm not sending histrionic rants to YouTube because I can't see any of their crappy videos.
If websites don't want me to visit them, I won't visit them. Simple. And I have lower blood pressure as a result.