I guess I was a bit too oblique. My point was the inconsistency of the position that Microsoft is simultaneously too weak to be assured of continued patronage and so powerful as to be harmfully monopolistic.
The reason is because in the U.S. there are a large number of (a) idiots and (b) immigrants who unfailingly spoil paper ballots in mind-blowing numbers by overvoting, making ambiguous marks, and numerous other creative modes of spoilage. The upshot with machines and computers is some kind of strange obsession with making sure that every last voter's intents are captured accurately. Personally, I'd use a standard paper ballot and take the position that if you are too stupid not to spoil it (maximum 2 do-overs per person per election), you are not qualified to vote. But that's apparently not how we do things here.
Actually I've always thought the ultimate geek dwelling would just be a single floor of some old industrial buidling; someplace where you could hang cable trays directly from exposed cieling beams.
What happens when you ask a bunch of nerds and engineers to collaborate on a home design? You get the DUH: Dilbert Ultimate House (Professional Edition).
I don't think it will be long before the physical media requirement is done away with, as it doesn't work all that well anyways, and since internet usage is so widespread, just require Steam or XBox-Live style home-phoning. I know people hate it, but in a lot of ways Steam is the least annoying, most convenient way of purchasing protected software I've ever used. Edge cases where physical media are purchased but no internet connection is available could be handled with Windows-style phone activation.
No it's not. It simply appears that way to you because you didn't get your optimal choice, and so were left with only less desirable choices. But such is life - you can't always get exactly what you want, and that is neither unfair nor unreasonable.
That article is out of date. In November 2005, Microsoft altered the license to remove the attribution requirement. See the link I posted in reply to the other poster.
certain agreements which are unavoidable with certain software
The agreements are always avoidable. Don't use the software. If people cannot be bothered to even inform themselves about what rights they are trading away by accepting those EULAs, then they have no right to complain.
Of course, if we follow that line of reasoning, all law is a form of violence. Which it is, in a sense. I'm not sure that's as persuasive an argument for anarchy as you seem to think it is, though.
American science and engineering almost universally use SI units nowadays, as does the government and also the military. On the other hand, for some day-to-day uses, the Imperial system works better and remains in use by the general population. (For example, as applied to weather, Fahrenheit is a pretty good 0-100 scale of comfort, "0" being dangerously cold and "100" being dangerously hot.) Due to some unique historical circumstances, the government is disinclined to try to force people to change unless there is some compelling reason to do so.
The biggest reason that the general population still uses legacy units, of course, is path dependency and an unwelcome attitude toward government intervention in this area.
They were purposely leading them to public assistance, rather than providing them basic benefits.
Were these programs supposed to be a secret or something? What is the purpose of those programs, if not to help the very people Wal*Mart was directing there? I just don't understand the mentality that says, "Let's set up a program for low-income people!" and then complains when the employer directs its low-income employees to the program. in fact, by creating the tax-funded assistance, you've created an incentive for the employer not to provide the benefit, and for the employee not to want it either! If that's a problem, how about fixing the program? But of course that places blame with the politicians instead of the third-party employer. Can't have that!
When the Katrina tapes came out, it took several stories before anyone picked up on the fact that the contents of the tapes directly contradicted Bush's claims made right after the storm that "nobody could have anticipated the levee failure". What's the point of a news outlet that manages to miss such an important element of the story?
Or even worse, gets that story wrong, because they're repeating the claims of partisans rather than actually bother to listen to the words?
Fascinating that a newspaper would run such a story, considering the huge numbers of newpaper articles that are barely rewritten press releases from special interest groups and politicians.
Slashdot Mirror
No, because it would only be preventing access to the virtual boot sector.
I guess I was a bit too oblique. My point was the inconsistency of the position that Microsoft is simultaneously too weak to be assured of continued patronage and so powerful as to be harmfully monopolistic.
The reason is because in the U.S. there are a large number of (a) idiots and (b) immigrants who unfailingly spoil paper ballots in mind-blowing numbers by overvoting, making ambiguous marks, and numerous other creative modes of spoilage. The upshot with machines and computers is some kind of strange obsession with making sure that every last voter's intents are captured accurately. Personally, I'd use a standard paper ballot and take the position that if you are too stupid not to spoil it (maximum 2 do-overs per person per election), you are not qualified to vote. But that's apparently not how we do things here.
That, and hosting their ads on .mac. I mean, why not use their own servers? Very amaeteur, I'd say.
No major screwups though..........that you know about.
Right, Microsoft doesn't have the power and market share to avoid paying fines for being a...um...powerful monopoly...
There are places like that, e.g. http://www.tewelesseed.com/progress.php
And a holodeck in the garage.
What happens when you ask a bunch of nerds and engineers to collaborate on a home design? You get the DUH: Dilbert Ultimate House (Professional Edition).
I don't think it will be long before the physical media requirement is done away with, as it doesn't work all that well anyways, and since internet usage is so widespread, just require Steam or XBox-Live style home-phoning. I know people hate it, but in a lot of ways Steam is the least annoying, most convenient way of purchasing protected software I've ever used. Edge cases where physical media are purchased but no internet connection is available could be handled with Windows-style phone activation.
No it's not. It simply appears that way to you because you didn't get your optimal choice, and so were left with only less desirable choices. But such is life - you can't always get exactly what you want, and that is neither unfair nor unreasonable.
That article is out of date. In November 2005, Microsoft altered the license to remove the attribution requirement. See the link I posted in reply to the other poster.
Link, please? I don't think you are correct.
MS FAQ
How about "Security Führer?" And don't forget the old-school "Security Komissar!"
The agreements are always avoidable. Don't use the software. If people cannot be bothered to even inform themselves about what rights they are trading away by accepting those EULAs, then they have no right to complain.
Of course, if we follow that line of reasoning, all law is a form of violence. Which it is, in a sense. I'm not sure that's as persuasive an argument for anarchy as you seem to think it is, though.
You can implement Microsoft Office XML formats royalty-free too.
The biggest reason that the general population still uses legacy units, of course, is path dependency and an unwelcome attitude toward government intervention in this area.
Why, that's also the temperature of my tea, earl grey!
The politics of failure have failed. It's time to make them work again.
Same here. Parent is spewing FUD - not informative.
Were these programs supposed to be a secret or something? What is the purpose of those programs, if not to help the very people Wal*Mart was directing there? I just don't understand the mentality that says, "Let's set up a program for low-income people!" and then complains when the employer directs its low-income employees to the program. in fact, by creating the tax-funded assistance, you've created an incentive for the employer not to provide the benefit, and for the employee not to want it either! If that's a problem, how about fixing the program? But of course that places blame with the politicians instead of the third-party employer. Can't have that!
Or even worse, gets that story wrong, because they're repeating the claims of partisans rather than actually bother to listen to the words?
All commercial advertising is "educating the public" in some sense - that doesn't make it a legitimate mission of a state university.
Fascinating that a newspaper would run such a story, considering the huge numbers of newpaper articles that are barely rewritten press releases from special interest groups and politicians.