And actually, the evil businesses he is targeting are not cheats. They followed the law to the letter. Blame congress for leaving the loop holes.
It is more fundamental than that. A business must make a profit to survive. Think about plain and simple truth for a moment...
Now think about this:
A business never pays any taxes. It merely collects the taxes levied on it by government by increasing the price of the goods and services it provides or by lowering the wages of its employees.
A sucky one though. I doubt many programmers on this board want to be in a position that the work they produce for a company is essentially worthless and the way to move up is through the tech support department. I also doubt customers would benefit either since giving away the software and charging for support creates an incentive to make shoddy software that requires a lot of hand-holding.
That might hold true until your competitor realises what you are doing and makes a better offer to the customer.
As a business customer I want Free as in Freedom software (to avoid vendor lock-in) that is easy to use (to lower total-cost-of-ownership) and comes with "enterprise" level support (for the edge cases I create that eventually break things in some way).
As a vendor I want software that is cheap to build and maintain over the long run, and I want to build brand loyalty (even in a fiercely competitive market) by delivering a great product, and I don't want to have to maintain a huge support staff that eats into the profits I make by selling support contracts. Enterprise customers will pay for support simply because it eliminates some risk, even if they never actually have to pick up the phone and use it.
From a technical perspective, Gecko is now very solid and no longer lags behind WebKit. A testament to the rate at which Gecko has been improving is its newfound viability in the mobile space, where it was practically considered a nonstarter not too long ago. Mozilla clearly has the resources, developer expertise, and community support to take Gecko anywhere that WebKit can go.
Given that nondemocratic governments routinely ignore these "rights" indicates to me that the existence of these rights in the US comes from all relevant parties honoring the US Constitution. Not because these rights are self-evident or exist outside of society and its rules, they do not. Nor because the Constitution "gives" these rights to a class of people. But because we chose to do so and because we hold the powerful to this contract.
As someone else rightly pointed out, the idea of inalienable rights is spelled out in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution of the United States. The Bill of Rights enumerates many of these inalienable rights. Even so, the original point is still valid. It is upon this basic idea that the US government was based:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
The idea is that these rights are given to all people by our Creator. If government chooses to deny us those rights, that government does so at its own peril.
You are continually missing (avoiding?) the point: The general populous does NOT understand how technology works. The general populous DOES know how to read and count. Any election system should be well studied and validated by the experts, but it must be understandable and trustworthy by the electorate that it is supposed to serve.
No. It is part of the checks and balances on the Judicial and Legislative branch (Legislative because if he wanted to, the President could pardon everyone convicted of a law he felt ran contrary to the country). He is supposed to show restraint in using the power and use it only when it does not weaken laws unnecessarily.
Of course, since President Bush doesn't seem to follow much for precedent in other areas, it comes as no surprise he commuted the sentence.
Oh please. First of all, Bush didn't pardon Libby, he commutated Libby's sentence. There is an important difference. Secondly, Clinton (pardons | commutations), Bush "Sr.", Reagan, Carter, and the rest have all made commutations and pardons that some would find offensive. Clinton pardon 3 people for perjury and commuted the sentence of another. I believe Reagan did the same for several people.
I wonder what flawed logic Bill Hilf bases his prediction on? His baseless remarks, if anything, are indicative of the fear that must be pervasive in the Microsoft culture.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Microsoft can't ignore Free Software anymore, so expect more laughing, more fighting, and more winning by Free Software.
Microsoft, for credibility will have to produce a detailled list of said patent violations (and eventually a list of specific OSS application that they think are infringing).
While I mostly agree with your sentiments (I don't think anyone said it was your obligation) --- to be the devil's advocate: if they can't make money and shut down their site, it does become your problem.
No, that is most definitely still the website's problem. If they can't figure out how to stay afloat without forcing their customers to do something they don't want to do (like keeping cookies for example), the competition surely will. Failure is a good thing; its a sign of a healthy economy.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, free market economies abhor a monopoly...
An unexplained rash of spontaneous cow explosions has resulted in a glut in the Canadian beef market...
AMEN!
And actually, the evil businesses he is targeting are not cheats. They followed the law to the letter. Blame congress for leaving the loop holes.
It is more fundamental than that. A business must make a profit to survive. Think about plain and simple truth for a moment...
Now think about this:
A business never pays any taxes. It merely collects the taxes levied on it by government by increasing the price of the goods and services it provides or by lowering the wages of its employees.
A sucky one though. I doubt many programmers on this board want to be in a position that the work they produce for a company is essentially worthless and the way to move up is through the tech support department. I also doubt customers would benefit either since giving away the software and charging for support creates an incentive to make shoddy software that requires a lot of hand-holding.
That might hold true until your competitor realises what you are doing and makes a better offer to the customer.
As a business customer I want Free as in Freedom software (to avoid vendor lock-in) that is easy to use (to lower total-cost-of-ownership) and comes with "enterprise" level support (for the edge cases I create that eventually break things in some way).
As a vendor I want software that is cheap to build and maintain over the long run, and I want to build brand loyalty (even in a fiercely competitive market) by delivering a great product, and I don't want to have to maintain a huge support staff that eats into the profits I make by selling support contracts. Enterprise customers will pay for support simply because it eliminates some risk, even if they never actually have to pick up the phone and use it.
Obama took out of his Presidential campaign to vote in favor of spying on innocent Americans.
What did you expect?
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00005906&cycle=Career
http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/
Now is a good time to buy Apple stock. ;)
As someone else rightly pointed out, the idea of inalienable rights is spelled out in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution of the United States. The Bill of Rights enumerates many of these inalienable rights. Even so, the original point is still valid. It is upon this basic idea that the US government was based:
The idea is that these rights are given to all people by our Creator. If government chooses to deny us those rights, that government does so at its own peril.
You are continually missing (avoiding?) the point: The general populous does NOT understand how technology works. The general populous DOES know how to read and count. Any election system should be well studied and validated by the experts, but it must be understandable and trustworthy by the electorate that it is supposed to serve.
Zonk's trolling and flame baiting is almost as bad as John C. Dvorak.
Oh please. First of all, Bush didn't pardon Libby, he commutated Libby's sentence. There is an important difference. Secondly, Clinton (pardons | commutations), Bush "Sr.", Reagan, Carter, and the rest have all made commutations and pardons that some would find offensive. Clinton pardon 3 people for perjury and commuted the sentence of another. I believe Reagan did the same for several people.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Microsoft can't ignore Free Software anymore, so expect more laughing, more fighting, and more winning by Free Software.
You can search the USPTO for Microsoft patents. I suggest that you then register with the Peer to Patent Project. If Microsoft decides to go to war, it will be fun to watch them get dismantled groklaw-style.
Read Section 7(2)(A)(ii)(II). He's actually worried about mind control...
Not that I necessarily agree with the context of your post, but here is how you can contact your reps:
Not that I don't trust a politician to faithfully present God's honest truth or anything, but here is the actual text of the resolution:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.res .00333:
Kucinich is waaaaay too paranoid to fall for that one...
This has been tried before with the Data Accountability and Trust Act. It was a decent piece of legislation until the corporate lobbyist screwed it up...
The upgrade instructions on the Only Ubuntu Linux blog seem pretty good. But I haven't had a chance to try them myself yet. :)
No, that is most definitely still the website's problem. If they can't figure out how to stay afloat without forcing their customers to do something they don't want to do (like keeping cookies for example), the competition surely will. Failure is a good thing; its a sign of a healthy economy.
You might want to read all of the pertinent information about HR811 first hand before contacting your representative about it.
Making statements of fact (i.e. telling the truth) it is not defamation, libel, or slander.