We are entitled to freedom of speech. We are entitled to privacy. We are entitled to freedom of movement. We are entitled to enjoy the fruits of our labor. We are entitled to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, or something like that. Rights come from power, not weakness or acquiescing to authority. Nobody will give us any rights unless we are willing to take them. The rights you enjoy came from force. Not necessarily the force of arms, but they can be acquired through the force of unity. We are losing our rights due to our own divisions, nothing more. Too many of us are giving them up to false pretenses and promises. So if a company does not want to support the community, then the community has no reason to support the company. We can unite to put that company out of business. If they want our patronage, then they must provide something in return. It's a two way street. No violence required, but history has shown who usually draws first blood. It is generally well understood who steals the land and a person's livelihood. So, yes we are ENTITLED to something from them...if we are to allow them to maintain possession of stolen property. Otherwise we have every right to run them off.
Regardless of whether it's "left" or "right", I'm glad to see employees standing up for their rights. It's about time that they start setting the conditions of employment. It brings back a balance of power to a degree.
And that comes back to my original point that the smugglers make the rules. They create the regulations to keep the competition out, not for any particular public interest. On a small scale you might have open bidding. But, as always, people will succumb to temptation. Until they effectively shun the the pirates, and resist their false promises of personal prosperity, that's the way it will go. And people like George Bush and Hillary will continue to win elections. We are in a true quagmire because democracy doesn't work, and there are no benevolent dictators.
The idea of a publicly visible bidding process is certainly worth pursuing if the aim is reduction of corruption, even if it means that it adds regulations to the system.
Absolutely right. The key is "publicly visible" and open. If we can accomplish that, then we could put a real dent in the corruption. Here again, I put the blame squarely on our own shoulders for not demanding such openness. Proper management is our responsibility. But in the grand scheme we have simply handed to power over and have gone back to sleep until the next election comes up. The government says "Trust us", and unfortunately that's exactly what the public does. We're now hearing more about the corrupt people "donating" to the Hillary campaign, and yet she still leads by a wide margin. Everybody is still ignoring Whitewater and her insane national insurance proposals from her first "term". Lord only knows what kind of scams she has pulled off up there on the east coast to acquire the power she has. This should not be, so I am not holding out much hope for any changes for the better in '09. May as well keep Bush. I can assure you that the entire current crop of front runners are no better. The smugglers and pirates will have another good five years, at least.
I guess that's why "real" democracy will always be small potatoes. The minute you start moving real money, all that goes up in a puff of smoke and the pirates will take control.
To me, normal software does not require installation at all, other than simply copying it to the folder of your choice.
Some examples would be: 1) For Windows, The Mozilla suite Filezilla Blender Exact Audio Copy Audacity Miranda And many more that I can't remember right now but have stashed away somewhere
2) For the Mac, Almost everything
These programs I can put on a thumb drive and run from any machine. These are the kind of programs I recommend to others.
How the heck is that "Not really as bad as most people think"?
Because, unlike what was stated to the post I responded to, you can disable the problem parts. And if he never used Real Player, how could he possibly know this? It would otherwise appear that his assumptions are unfounded, which as it turns out, they are.
to another useful tool that helped sysadmins apply Microsoft's numerous patches.
Hello to a useful alternative operating system. If Microsoft doesn't want our business, we shouldn't give it to them. However, the desire for control of updates is understandable from a liability point of view, although they claim they don't have any...liability that is.
Well, I have used real player, and I can and do disassociate it from other file types. It just takes a bit more effort than most are accustomed to. And it's possible to to kill most of its spyware activities and other intrusive behaviors. So, it's not really as bad as most people think, but I don't install it anymore simply because I like to stay clear of most third party software when I can. I only apply this "rule" to Windows machines due to the awful, sloppy way programs are installed.
Oh c'mon! How does any prohibition help smugglers? Contract or no contract? It doesn't matter if it's legal or not. The point is the deal was done, and lots of money passed hands. It works in the same way that airlines put bogus parts on their aircraft.
We need laws like this to replenish the work force being vacated by deported immigrants. Where will the new workers come from? Where else? For this burgeoning industry the law is more than sensible. Expect much, much more of this.
They had the choice to close up shop. As it is, they are collaborators with a fascist regime. Shame on the corporate officers and shame on the shareholders. They all share the blame.
I spent over two hours trying to see where in my post is the implication that it did. If anything, his excesses tried to make opposing the U.S. government in any fashion wrong. I suppose opposing all tyranny, no matter where it comes from, is kinda whack. I believe my comment was more about his methods than anything else.
He's everywhere. In the white house, the halls of congress. He's running the FBI, DHS, DEA... He's listening to your phone calls, reading your mail... He lives on the west coast, the east coast, the middle coast, down the block, right next door... He has penetrated your collective soul. He is everywhere.
Well that sounds absolutely, completely off. Results are precisely what was paid for. Otherwise why pay for the research? I'm not paying for research. I'm paying for answers. How you get those answers is the researchers' problem. Oh, but I do want to see your work, so I can verify the veracity of your answers.
Slashdot Mirror
We are entitled to freedom of speech. We are entitled to privacy. We are entitled to freedom of movement. We are entitled to enjoy the fruits of our labor. We are entitled to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, or something like that. Rights come from power, not weakness or acquiescing to authority. Nobody will give us any rights unless we are willing to take them. The rights you enjoy came from force. Not necessarily the force of arms, but they can be acquired through the force of unity. We are losing our rights due to our own divisions, nothing more. Too many of us are giving them up to false pretenses and promises. So if a company does not want to support the community, then the community has no reason to support the company. We can unite to put that company out of business. If they want our patronage, then they must provide something in return. It's a two way street. No violence required, but history has shown who usually draws first blood. It is generally well understood who steals the land and a person's livelihood. So, yes we are ENTITLED to something from them...if we are to allow them to maintain possession of stolen property. Otherwise we have every right to run them off.
Just ask them to sing The Trolley Song.
Don't stomp your little last season Prada shoes at me, honey.
Regardless of whether it's "left" or "right", I'm glad to see employees standing up for their rights. It's about time that they start setting the conditions of employment. It brings back a balance of power to a degree.
And that comes back to my original point that the smugglers make the rules. They create the regulations to keep the competition out, not for any particular public interest. On a small scale you might have open bidding. But, as always, people will succumb to temptation. Until they effectively shun the the pirates, and resist their false promises of personal prosperity, that's the way it will go. And people like George Bush and Hillary will continue to win elections. We are in a true quagmire because democracy doesn't work, and there are no benevolent dictators.
The idea of a publicly visible bidding process is certainly worth pursuing if the aim is reduction of corruption, even if it means that it adds regulations to the system.
Absolutely right. The key is "publicly visible" and open. If we can accomplish that, then we could put a real dent in the corruption. Here again, I put the blame squarely on our own shoulders for not demanding such openness. Proper management is our responsibility. But in the grand scheme we have simply handed to power over and have gone back to sleep until the next election comes up. The government says "Trust us", and unfortunately that's exactly what the public does. We're now hearing more about the corrupt people "donating" to the Hillary campaign, and yet she still leads by a wide margin. Everybody is still ignoring Whitewater and her insane national insurance proposals from her first "term". Lord only knows what kind of scams she has pulled off up there on the east coast to acquire the power she has. This should not be, so I am not holding out much hope for any changes for the better in '09. May as well keep Bush. I can assure you that the entire current crop of front runners are no better. The smugglers and pirates will have another good five years, at least.
I guess that's why "real" democracy will always be small potatoes. The minute you start moving real money, all that goes up in a puff of smoke and the pirates will take control.
To me, normal software does not require installation at all, other than simply copying it to the folder of your choice.
Some examples would be:
1) For Windows,
The Mozilla suite
Filezilla
Blender
Exact Audio Copy
Audacity
Miranda
And many more that I can't remember right now but have stashed away somewhere
2) For the Mac,
Almost everything
These programs I can put on a thumb drive and run from any machine. These are the kind of programs I recommend to others.
How the heck is that "Not really as bad as most people think"?
Because, unlike what was stated to the post I responded to, you can disable the problem parts. And if he never used Real Player, how could he possibly know this? It would otherwise appear that his assumptions are unfounded, which as it turns out, they are.
"I asked the representative if Windows Genuine Advantage had anything to do with it and he categorically told me this was not the case..."
"I am not gay; I never have been gay..."
to another useful tool that helped sysadmins apply Microsoft's numerous patches.
Hello to a useful alternative operating system. If Microsoft doesn't want our business, we shouldn't give it to them. However, the desire for control of updates is understandable from a liability point of view, although they claim they don't have any...liability that is.
Well, I have used real player, and I can and do disassociate it from other file types. It just takes a bit more effort than most are accustomed to. And it's possible to to kill most of its spyware activities and other intrusive behaviors. So, it's not really as bad as most people think, but I don't install it anymore simply because I like to stay clear of most third party software when I can. I only apply this "rule" to Windows machines due to the awful, sloppy way programs are installed.
Unlike you, I actually work for a government that does due diligence on contracts.
Yes, that's all very quaint, but this is how the big boys play.It's a smuggler's paradise. More prohibitions will make it true heaven.
I was waiting for someone to make that reference.
And I'm still waiting for my "Funny" mods...Tap tap tap...Helllooo...Is this thing on? Check, one, two...
Oh c'mon! How does any prohibition help smugglers? Contract or no contract? It doesn't matter if it's legal or not. The point is the deal was done, and lots of money passed hands. It works in the same way that airlines put bogus parts on their aircraft.
It has nothing to do with technology. It's about acceding to the demands of an entirely different industry.
We need laws like this to replenish the work force being vacated by deported immigrants. Where will the new workers come from? Where else? For this burgeoning industry the law is more than sensible. Expect much, much more of this.
Can we go back to business after slapping Yahoo's wrist?
Yeah, I guess... I got some catching up to do on my The Young & the Restless tapes anyway.
They had the choice to close up shop. As it is, they are collaborators with a fascist regime. Shame on the corporate officers and shame on the shareholders. They all share the blame.
Ohhh, I don't know... Maybe this could offer up a few pointers.
Now we may never know if ants can be trained to sort tiny screws in space.
I spent over two hours trying to see where in my post is the implication that it did. If anything, his excesses tried to make opposing the U.S. government in any fashion wrong. I suppose opposing all tyranny, no matter where it comes from, is kinda whack. I believe my comment was more about his methods than anything else.
If I was a smuggler, I would be all for that kind of prohibition. In fact, I would be for all kinds of prohibition.
Where's McCarthy when we need him?
He's everywhere. In the white house, the halls of congress. He's running the FBI, DHS, DEA... He's listening to your phone calls, reading your mail... He lives on the west coast, the east coast, the middle coast, down the block, right next door... He has penetrated your collective soul. He is everywhere.
This will go over like a lead balloon.
Ah, but you didn't pay for the results.
Well that sounds absolutely, completely off. Results are precisely what was paid for. Otherwise why pay for the research? I'm not paying for research. I'm paying for answers. How you get those answers is the researchers' problem. Oh, but I do want to see your work, so I can verify the veracity of your answers.
Persistence is a virtue. More power...