"Do you legalise the possession of all child, violent and bestiality porn?"
That suggests that those are somehow inherently illegal and that something must be done to make them legal. The question is irrelevant as cartoons aren't those things.
"It's a tough question as to where to draw the line."
Not really, it's just that governments don't have the balls or the inclination to do the right thing; they has no problem victimizing a few that are on the fringes of society. It's not hard to imagine that the line should be drawn nowhere close to an activity where there is no victim whatsoever.
The entire justification for making such material illegal is to protect victims. Extending the scope of such bans
Sounds terrible. I don't want mandatory RAID to correct for errors that occur frequently, I don't want to burden the main system with work that has always been done effectively within hardware, and I want my error handling performed close to the metal. It isn't as though space is at premium these days.
The fundamental design of RAID assumes that drives are capable of knowing when they fail and that capability relies on embedded ECC. ZFS seems to think doing a poor imitation of that on the host CPU is a great idea but I don't.
His belief that 4:3 constitutes a "portrait" display tells you all you need to know about his technical understanding. Ultimate connectivity? Wedding photographer's friend? Yeah, whatever. I prefer notebooks with a CPU.
"The GPL is a defence mechanism, primarily against vendors who would take open code, perform minor changes to break compatibility and they try to lock people in to proprietary forks. Noone really likes it, it's just a sad fact of life that if you give people too much freedom they will abuse it."
That's nonsense. The GPL isn't a "defence (sic) mechanism" and to say "Noone (sic) really likes it" is absurd. The GPL is the primary means for advancing an ideology where everyone has source for everything. There are plenty who love it.
If Facebook doesn't get meaningful traffic from Google then Google doesn't need Facebook's content. You ought to think about that a little harder.
To damage Google, you'd need enough valuable content to opt out and it's unlikely you can make that happen with a little cash. It doesn't surprise me that Cuban thought up something like that, though. Frankly, he doesn't seem all that bright.
Why? because reading glasses are the proper, high performance solution that also happens to be low cost. Large, low resolution monitors are not only expensive and demanding of desk space, they are lower in performance.
The only reason not to use reading glasses when they are necessary in a work environment is vanity. There is no "convenient and pain-free" tool that will solve every older worker's presbyopia problem except proper eyesight correction.
Interesting that everything you said failed to contradict the sentence you quoted and one that you thought worthy of insult. Feeling threatened?
"...but to claim it is just a matter of upbringing or social conditioning is demonstratively false regardless of how well it might fit with your preferred political ideology."
Of course, he didn't make that claim and I suspect your objections are due to your own ideology.
"I have known people who bought Macs not because they were fans of Apple, but because they were dissatisfied with PCs loaded with Windows....They found Macs to be a breath of fresh air not because they think Apple is "hip" and "cool" but because they found its GUI to be easy and intuitive and its underlying Unix system to be rock-solid stable and not prone to malware. They felt like they found something that "just worked" and felt like that is what they were paying a higher price for. I think of these folks as Apple's target audience."
Exactly, they found Macs to be "hip" and "cool".
Seriously, these specific users you talk about don't find Mac's GUI immediately "easy and intuitive" nor the underlying "Unix system" "rock-solid stable" nor do they even know. These are things Mac fanboys like to say, however.
"Just because this is Glenn Beck, and there is almost a syndrome about the Beck/Limbaugh/Fox hatred going on right, doesn't take away from the vile level to which some people stoop to personally destroy someone."
By "some people", are you referring to Beck/Limbaugh/Fox?
"If this was: www.didmichelleobamagangbangacollegefootballteamandgetpregnant.org people would be furious with the decision that it was legal."
Such a domain would be unlikely to result in a similar lawsuit and I don't agree that people would be furious over the outcome.
"Maybe I'm wrong, but I do look for a certain level of intellectual honest on/. After all, this isn't the Huffington Post."
You will find at least as much as you offer, but you apparently have a sense of humor.
"...GPL is a license that protects those who use and modify the software from their predecessors, BSD is open code with the ability to conceal the source."
More nonsense. The difference between GPL and BSD is what restrictions are placed on developers who make new works based on existing software. A BSD license cannot enable any ability to conceal source that is already revealed.
RMS claims to be all about giving control to the user yet BSD license accomplishes that just as completely as a GPL one. The GPL not just about that, it's about more.
Slashdot Mirror
"Surely you can't believe...that Beck is more extreme than Olberman."
Seriously?
"if we've learned anything from the iPhone and iPod it's that Apple has tremendous influence in driving the standards of consumer electronics."
What standards of consumer electronics has Apple driven with the iPhone and iPod?
"You could say the same about any pornography..."
No you can't.
"Do you legalise the possession of all child, violent and bestiality porn?"
That suggests that those are somehow inherently illegal and that something must be done to make them legal. The question is irrelevant as cartoons aren't those things.
"It's a tough question as to where to draw the line."
Not really, it's just that governments don't have the balls or the inclination to do the right thing; they has no problem victimizing a few that are on the fringes of society. It's not hard to imagine that the line should be drawn nowhere close to an activity where there is no victim whatsoever.
The entire justification for making such material illegal is to protect victims. Extending the scope of such bans
And all those observations were valid. Apple addressed a lot of those limitations with follow-on products or perhaps it would have failed.
Perhaps what you mean by "wait and see" is to see if Apple fixes the iPad to be what people want.
The point is that the disk does this already and in a vastly better and more important way so why does ZFS bother and lose more space?
Sounds terrible. I don't want mandatory RAID to correct for errors that occur frequently, I don't want to burden the main system with work that has always been done effectively within hardware, and I want my error handling performed close to the metal. It isn't as though space is at premium these days.
The fundamental design of RAID assumes that drives are capable of knowing when they fail and that capability relies on embedded ECC. ZFS seems to think doing a poor imitation of that on the host CPU is a great idea but I don't.
You like to talk a lot and say nothing interesting.
His belief that 4:3 constitutes a "portrait" display tells you all you need to know about his technical understanding. Ultimate connectivity? Wedding photographer's friend? Yeah, whatever. I prefer notebooks with a CPU.
"The GPL is a defence mechanism, primarily against vendors who would take open code, perform minor changes to break compatibility and they try to lock people in to proprietary forks. Noone really likes it, it's just a sad fact of life that if you give people too much freedom they will abuse it."
That's nonsense. The GPL isn't a "defence (sic) mechanism" and to say "Noone (sic) really likes it" is absurd. The GPL is the primary means for advancing an ideology where everyone has source for everything. There are plenty who love it.
I love it when a fanatic offers us a "history" lesson as seen through his magic, revisionist glasses.
I'm not sure what's more pathetic, that you believe that it matters or that you believe that $10,000 is an impressive amount.
If Facebook doesn't get meaningful traffic from Google then Google doesn't need Facebook's content. You ought to think about that a little harder.
To damage Google, you'd need enough valuable content to opt out and it's unlikely you can make that happen with a little cash. It doesn't surprise me that Cuban thought up something like that, though. Frankly, he doesn't seem all that bright.
Why? because reading glasses are the proper, high performance solution that also happens to be low cost. Large, low resolution monitors are not only expensive and demanding of desk space, they are lower in performance.
The only reason not to use reading glasses when they are necessary in a work environment is vanity. There is no "convenient and pain-free" tool that will solve every older worker's presbyopia problem except proper eyesight correction.
boys evolve?
Interesting that everything you said failed to contradict the sentence you quoted and one that you thought worthy of insult. Feeling threatened?
"...but to claim it is just a matter of upbringing or social conditioning is demonstratively false regardless of how well it might fit with your preferred political ideology."
Of course, he didn't make that claim and I suspect your objections are due to your own ideology.
Are you suggesting those "factors" are effecting 2 year old boys?
"I have known people who bought Macs not because they were fans of Apple, but because they were dissatisfied with PCs loaded with Windows. ...They found Macs to be a breath of fresh air not because they think Apple is "hip" and "cool" but because they found its GUI to be easy and intuitive and its underlying Unix system to be rock-solid stable and not prone to malware. They felt like they found something that "just worked" and felt like that is what they were paying a higher price for. I think of these folks as Apple's target audience."
Exactly, they found Macs to be "hip" and "cool".
Seriously, these specific users you talk about don't find Mac's GUI immediately "easy and intuitive" nor the underlying "Unix system" "rock-solid stable" nor do they even know. These are things Mac fanboys like to say, however.
"Just because this is Glenn Beck, and there is almost a syndrome about the Beck/Limbaugh/Fox hatred going on right, doesn't take away from the vile level to which some people stoop to personally destroy someone."
By "some people", are you referring to Beck/Limbaugh/Fox?
"If this was: www.didmichelleobamagangbangacollegefootballteamandgetpregnant.org people would be furious with the decision that it was legal."
Such a domain would be unlikely to result in a similar lawsuit and I don't agree that people would be furious over the outcome.
"Maybe I'm wrong, but I do look for a certain level of intellectual honest on /. After all, this isn't the Huffington Post."
You will find at least as much as you offer, but you apparently have a sense of humor.
Public domain does keep "my software" free for everyone "for ever". It can't do anything but that.
GPL is about forcing future software to also be free. Not using it doesn't rob anyone of anything.
Of course your landline phone needs external power. Do you believe in magic?
I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but you sound like an idiot.
"Apparently, the visual voice mail was a HUGELY expensive undertaking for AT&T."
What makes this apparent to you?
"...GPL is a license that protects those who use and modify the software from their predecessors, BSD is open code with the ability to conceal the source."
More nonsense. The difference between GPL and BSD is what restrictions are placed on developers who make new works based on existing software. A BSD license cannot enable any ability to conceal source that is already revealed.
Code that is released open stays open. The GPL is about forcing future code to released open.
RMS claims to be all about giving control to the user yet BSD license accomplishes that just as completely as a GPL one. The GPL not just about that, it's about more.