That policy change happened before the day was out, even - as evidenced by a field in Pennsylvania. An airliner in the US will never be hijacked again.
I was on a flight last night, actually, and looked over to see a fire extinguisher behind the last row of seats.
I can't take nail clippers on the plane (because I might hijack it!), but its okay to leave a fire extinguisher sitting there. Ever see someone sprayed with a fire extinguisher?
If America was a truly free country still, 9/11 would have ended with a bunch of terrorists with gunshot wounds.
Good to know. I've been doing all my network stuff from an xterm for a long time, but didn't know there was a valid reason for it other than my being too damned lazy to look for a GUI app.
He didn't say he was being snotty about it --- he came to a point where it was most beneficial for the company to open the source to a piece of software - to benefit form others' expertise. They were not willing to do so, and GP decided that meant they weren't letting him do his job.
This, coming from a hardcore libertarian conservative. Free (libre) software need not be a quasi-communist religion - in many cases, it is advantageous to all parties to open the codebase to a project.
My own personal experience is as an electrician in NW Arkansas. It was very difficult to get a job anywhere without fluency in Spanish. That's well and good, but as I came to know the Hispanics around me, I found out that most of them - of the 12 that I worked with regularly, 10 - were illegal. I was eventually laid off from that job, and from the next in the field. This was before the downturn in the economy.
So - call me a racist if you'd like, but based upon my own personal experience, there *is* a good chance that a Latino I meet on the street is in this country illegally. Obviously, 12 people aren't a representative sample, but it was a fair look at the construction industry.
I agree the immigration system should be reformed. The only requirement for entrance into this country should be showing up at the border, at a checkpoint. The mere fact that it is difficult to enter legally does not make it right to enter illegally.
I'm a gun owner, and it is very difficult to purchase a full-auto rifle, for the same reason it is hard to get into the US --- strict laws. If it is acceptable for the immigrant to cross the border illegally, why is it not okay for me to drop and auto-sear into my AR-15?
I went to college with a German-born immigrant that constantly got called names and even once had a death threat tacked to his dorm door - he looked very much like an Arab, but wasn't even close.
Individuals banding together, each contributing and receiving value in return is what the free market is all about - there are no conflicts of interest amongst rational actors.
The problems start when people decide that they know better than the individual, and want to force - or "incentivize" - their compliance.
The real battle in society is not capitalism vs. socialism, but statism vs. individualism.
A small amount of government is necessary. Unfortunately, the nature of government is such that it always expands its power over time, creeping to the right of the scale. Eventually, its gets far enough that the citizens of a nation will either give in or overthrow it, and go back to the far left.
As a "pure capitalist", you're right. I'd be happy if we actually followed the US Constitution. I'd be ecstatic if we threw out compulsory taxes and that whole "promote the general welfare" part.
And if your code is so hot I feel I must use it, I'll license mine GPL as well - which I can do, provided I haven't used an incompatible license elsewhere.
I really don't get why people make a software license a religion. Its just business - is the advantage you get by using the product outweighed by its requirements? That's all there is to it, after all.
Say what you want, but Chrome is my default browser in Vista, and has been since it came out. I don't visit a lot of random sites, and ads aren't that big a deal.
The reason I like Chrome? Its topbar is thinner and more elegant that Firefox's by default. Really, that's it.
Otherwise, I'm your typical nerd. I run ArchLinux, use Firefox+Firebug for development, and I doubt I could get a girlfriend if I tried (I married the girl who dated me in highschool, before she realized what she had done, so that's okay)
Look, I don't have an issue with whatever license an author wants to apply to their code. Community-driven projects make sense as GPL. Personal projects, however, make more sense as MIT in my eyes, so they can be integrated into more larger projects, regardless of license. If you don't want that, more power to ya. I'm not attached to the license ideologically like some of the Linux/FSF community seems to be.
I must be missing something - I only see where they are releasing the code to version of GPL software used on their routers. That's not the same thing as releasing their OS.
The GPL is the only major license where this is even an issue, and then only if you distribute the software. Unless you're a software company, your "key IP assets" are safe.
I'm not real big on the GPL, but this is hardly a shakedown. More like repeatedly begging them to abide by the terms they agreed to, taking them to court, then settling before going to trial where more $$ could have be obtained from them.
FSF wanted Cisco to follow the agreement, not to suck money from the company.
Placing safety restrictions onto an activity and preventing someone from doing it altogether are very different things.
And FWIW, there are many places that a race track on private property will be illegal regardless. California, for instance, requires that vehicles be licensed and inspected if they are operational, not just if they are driven on a public road.
So, what happens when someone gets hit from behind, and sues the manufacturer of this device because it cut off the accelerator and wouldn't let them gun it to get out of the way?
Slashdot Mirror
Just out of curiosity, have you ever been in a situation that involved the use of deadly force?
Do you honestly think a planeful of people are going to let someone take over the controls, regardless of what weapon he might have?
That's not happening - it simply won't. They'd have to kill everyone on the plane.
That policy change happened before the day was out, even - as evidenced by a field in Pennsylvania. An airliner in the US will never be hijacked again.
I was on a flight last night, actually, and looked over to see a fire extinguisher behind the last row of seats.
I can't take nail clippers on the plane (because I might hijack it!), but its okay to leave a fire extinguisher sitting there. Ever see someone sprayed with a fire extinguisher?
If America was a truly free country still, 9/11 would have ended with a bunch of terrorists with gunshot wounds.
Good to know. I've been doing all my network stuff from an xterm for a long time, but didn't know there was a valid reason for it other than my being too damned lazy to look for a GUI app.
He didn't say he was being snotty about it --- he came to a point where it was most beneficial for the company to open the source to a piece of software - to benefit form others' expertise. They were not willing to do so, and GP decided that meant they weren't letting him do his job.
This, coming from a hardcore libertarian conservative. Free (libre) software need not be a quasi-communist religion - in many cases, it is advantageous to all parties to open the codebase to a project.
My own personal experience is as an electrician in NW Arkansas. It was very difficult to get a job anywhere without fluency in Spanish. That's well and good, but as I came to know the Hispanics around me, I found out that most of them - of the 12 that I worked with regularly, 10 - were illegal. I was eventually laid off from that job, and from the next in the field. This was before the downturn in the economy.
So - call me a racist if you'd like, but based upon my own personal experience, there *is* a good chance that a Latino I meet on the street is in this country illegally. Obviously, 12 people aren't a representative sample, but it was a fair look at the construction industry.
I agree the immigration system should be reformed. The only requirement for entrance into this country should be showing up at the border, at a checkpoint. The mere fact that it is difficult to enter legally does not make it right to enter illegally.
I'm a gun owner, and it is very difficult to purchase a full-auto rifle, for the same reason it is hard to get into the US --- strict laws. If it is acceptable for the immigrant to cross the border illegally, why is it not okay for me to drop and auto-sear into my AR-15?
So... uh...
You're speaking from experience, because you showed up at one, right?
No?
I went to college with a German-born immigrant that constantly got called names and even once had a death threat tacked to his dorm door - he looked very much like an Arab, but wasn't even close.
Volunteer fire department - I pay fire dues that are unrelated to property taxes. Try again.
So why do I pay property taxes on my piece of unimproved land with no utility - or road - access?
I mean, even the most wing-nut conservatives believe in some sort of tax or anti-trust laws
No, we don't.
This is what I was thinking.
Individuals banding together, each contributing and receiving value in return is what the free market is all about - there are no conflicts of interest amongst rational actors.
The problems start when people decide that they know better than the individual, and want to force - or "incentivize" - their compliance.
The real battle in society is not capitalism vs. socialism, but statism vs. individualism.
You're confusing "freedom" and "liberty" - different concepts. Absent of rules, you have freedom. The scale looks like this (kinda):
Freedom(Anarchy) --->---> Liberty--->---> --->---> --->---> --->---> --->--->Tyranny(Totalitarianism)
A small amount of government is necessary. Unfortunately, the nature of government is such that it always expands its power over time, creeping to the right of the scale. Eventually, its gets far enough that the citizens of a nation will either give in or overthrow it, and go back to the far left.
Words have meaning - use the right one
As a "pure capitalist", you're right. I'd be happy if we actually followed the US Constitution. I'd be ecstatic if we threw out compulsory taxes and that whole "promote the general welfare" part.
And if your code is so hot I feel I must use it, I'll license mine GPL as well - which I can do, provided I haven't used an incompatible license elsewhere.
I really don't get why people make a software license a religion. Its just business - is the advantage you get by using the product outweighed by its requirements? That's all there is to it, after all.
Say what you want, but Chrome is my default browser in Vista, and has been since it came out. I don't visit a lot of random sites, and ads aren't that big a deal.
The reason I like Chrome? Its topbar is thinner and more elegant that Firefox's by default. Really, that's it.
Otherwise, I'm your typical nerd. I run ArchLinux, use Firefox+Firebug for development, and I doubt I could get a girlfriend if I tried (I married the girl who dated me in highschool, before she realized what she had done, so that's okay)
Because I don't prefer to license my code GPL?
Look, I don't have an issue with whatever license an author wants to apply to their code. Community-driven projects make sense as GPL. Personal projects, however, make more sense as MIT in my eyes, so they can be integrated into more larger projects, regardless of license. If you don't want that, more power to ya. I'm not attached to the license ideologically like some of the Linux/FSF community seems to be.
I must be missing something - I only see where they are releasing the code to version of GPL software used on their routers. That's not the same thing as releasing their OS.
The GPL is the only major license where this is even an issue, and then only if you distribute the software. Unless you're a software company, your "key IP assets" are safe.
I'm not real big on the GPL, but this is hardly a shakedown. More like repeatedly begging them to abide by the terms they agreed to, taking them to court, then settling before going to trial where more $$ could have be obtained from them.
FSF wanted Cisco to follow the agreement, not to suck money from the company.
Oh, and it *is* okay to drive a tank at 10mph on the highway. I have a friend with a halftrack we take out sometimes, and it doesn't go over 35 or 40.
Placing safety restrictions onto an activity and preventing someone from doing it altogether are very different things.
And FWIW, there are many places that a race track on private property will be illegal regardless. California, for instance, requires that vehicles be licensed and inspected if they are operational, not just if they are driven on a public road.
While you're correct from a US legal aspect, you fail to mention that the ability to travel freely is a fundamental aspect of liberty.
Just because that's the law, doesn't make it right.
So, what happens when someone gets hit from behind, and sues the manufacturer of this device because it cut off the accelerator and wouldn't let them gun it to get out of the way?