So how would you write w00t and pwn? They are valid in their contexts. Now I'm not saying Bush should say he "pwned Iraq" or anything, but still, in the online realm, a judicious use is acceptable.
Explain exactly why encryption, DRM, and upgrades make the console useless for typing and prnting simple word documents (school essays, letters, etc.) and surfing a large part of the Internet (Slashdot and other normal HTML sites, and legal* music services).
That's about all most people do with a computer anyway.
*Legal implies neither moral nor immoral. It means only legal.
You realize how dumb they'd sound if they did so, after all the years of anti-Linux and anti-OSS rhetoric?
"Yes, we used to fight open source, but, ah well, it's not that evil, it's really useful...just buy Microsoft Linux though and a Shared Source license, so OSS companies can't go after profits on it...."
If possible, I would gladly support something that removed either sexual desire or sexual pleasure when children are involved. But that's impossible (with present technology). Removing children, as you suggest, is stupid, for it destroys our species. We could imprison sex offenders, but that costs too much on our prisons and taxpayers and leaves room for abuse there (the classic 18-year-old/17-year-old anecdote). So one thing that we can try to remove is the capitalist demand for child abuse for monetary, not sexual, reasons. And thus we try. How is it worse to try than not?
Feeling and emotion are artificial constructs that evolution created to encourage us to survive, in this case, to have sex. Would you have sex if it were neither meaningful nor pleasurable, but gave you kids, even whom you didn't love?
Unfortunately, the emotion was attached to the act of sex, not to the birth. This worked before birth control. If the population falls enough due to an abnormal births/mating ratio, perhaps we will see emotions and feeling eventually react.
Because the point of sex is kids. Biologically, the reason sexual reproduction evolved is for more diversity in the gene pool, and thus more ability to survive, and the purpose of any species is just to perpetuate itself.
I do not believe that child porn creates all child abuse, just that it creates some of it. The word "industry" I used specifies a way of making a profit. I don't suppose kids pay to be abused?
I repeat: if there is no way of making a profit, there is lesser reason to continue the action. This is the converse of the capitalist thesis. Yes, there are, shall we say, other reasons for child abuse (the same reasons that make people pay for child porn), but I don't see an easy way to remove those benefits. Money is the one thing the government has easy control over.
The "sorry shlub"s comprise the market. If there's no money in child pr0n, there's no need to continue the industry. Yes, it is impossible to remove the market, but it can be cut significantly, with direct arrests and just fear of arrest.
During this time, a paediatrician was hounded out of her home and forced to move because people incorrectly associated her job title with paedophilia.
After Marc Antony's "Friends, Romans, countrymen" speech which incited the mob:
Third Citizen: Your name, sir, truly. Cinna the Poet: Truly, my name is Cinna. First Citizen: Tear him to pieces; he's a conspirator. Cinna the Poet: I am Cinna the poet, I am Cinna the poet. Fourth Citizen: Tear him for his bad verses, tear him for his bad verses. Cinna the Poet: I am not Cinna the conspirator. Fourth Citizen: It is no matter, his name's Cinna; pluck but his name out of his heart, and turn him going.
I guess the canonical books that my mom uses to teach (and, when I was in preschool, learn) operating systems design and other CS topics are not to his credit?
I was not being fair or unfair to Microsoft. I was being neutral, which is a good strategy when trying to inform, not debate. Actually, the focus here is on AdTI, Tanenbaum, and MINIX/Linux, not MS or SCO, so I compressed that part.
Maybe I was incorrect, but you have not informed me where. From what I have heard, MS bought QDOS, based on CP/M. I assume they modified it. Then they licensed it to IBM. I still do not see how this was something I was wrongly "fair" to. Maybe it was morally wrong to most people or to you, but businesswise it was brilliant.
Tanenbaum wrote MINIX, an operating system that was mildly popular in the days Linux was getting started. Tanenbaum and Torvalds had a famous debate on OS design and the like between MINIX and Linux.
Ken Brown is employed by the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute, a firm that some Slashdotters speculate is in the pay of SCO, MS, or the ilk, and is trying to find criticisms against Linux, recently making the claim that Torvalds did not write Linux, which is probably too open to interpretation. Torvalds wrote Linux to the extent that he typed it, but he did built on prior work, just like everyone else. Even Microsoft originally bought all rights to DOS from a third party and modified and licensed it to IBM for their contract.
(At least, this is what I myself have gleaned from Slashdot. Some detail is probably wrong.)
Apple can be seen as a generic term - in fact, I would be completely legal if I ripped off a brand sticker from an apple (the fruit) and stuck it on my PC. Then it would be "apple-labeled". Does capitalization have any weight in court?
Yes. Buying rights to listen to music is not buying all rights to the music. Bill Gates payed a lot more than 99 cents for full rights for "Start Me Up" (regardless of whether you think it was worth it). Apple was sued for a lot more than 99c when it used Eminem's song in an ad without what he felt was necessary permission.
People, if you want to fight DRM, etc. there's only one way. Raise millions of dollars somehow, buy a song, and then distribute it freely. Or most likely don't, because you too will feel the need to be repaid some.
The most recent MP3s I listened to were of my church's youth choir, of which I am a part. And yes, I started singing along my part.
Incidentally, since I am one of the artists, what are my legal rights with respect to distributing the MP3s without asking permission of the choir director (or, worse, the entire choir)? We are unpaid, but the mini-orchestra that accompanied us was. And the CD was of course not free.
Didn't the files get distributed (copied) to your computer? Making further use of that copy is copyright violation.
It's like if you had software you rented for $5 a month. If you stopped paying but continued using, you would be liable for breach of contract and copyright violation - your "right" to "copy" was contingent upon your payment. Simply because you were earlier authorized to copy and use the software, it doesn't mean you are perpetually authorized to use one copy that you aren't copying any more.
Dante Alighieri wrote The Inferno, of course, but he also wrote a book called La Vita Nuova, "The New Life", a poetic expression of his love for Beatrice.
The organization that released Inferno is thus called Vita Nuova.
Deprecated, not depreciated. Depreciation means a gradual loss in value, as with your industrial machinery. Deprecation means someone important says that this is instantly not to be used anymore, as with Windows 95.;-)
With the number of moderators who have better things to do than seek out comments at 1 or 2 (with Karma-Bonus), we'll see the same posts go to 15, and no posts at 4 or 3 due to lack of moderation points. We may even get fewer posts going to 15, in which case we get a less diverse question pool. Don't expect to see a range between 7 and 15 for the top questions.
However, a public vote for 1-2 favorite questions where the n questions with the most votes are forwarded is probably the same idea, but may work without messing up moderation. (Moderation is like the Social Security of Slashdot; you don't touch it for fear of breaking the parts of it that do work.)
What was stolen from them was the hiddenness of their code, their ability to depend on its closed-source nature to avoid people looking at the code to create exploits, possibly the marketability of the routers, and their reputation for security. It's a linguistic convenience to state that the code was stolen rather than the byproducts of the code were stolen - or more accurately, annulled, since the theives don't have that either. Much as looking at a computer = looking at its monitor, or a person chewing = their mouth chewing, IP stolen = its use stolen.
Slashdot Mirror
You just gave me a great idea for an educational video game on Dante's Inferno.
Don't you mean Xbox Next?
In which case it would be more like asking Steve Jobs to do said review.
So how would you write w00t and pwn? They are valid in their contexts. Now I'm not saying Bush should say he "pwned Iraq" or anything, but still, in the online realm, a judicious use is acceptable.
Explain exactly why encryption, DRM, and upgrades make the console useless for typing and prnting simple word documents (school essays, letters, etc.) and surfing a large part of the Internet (Slashdot and other normal HTML sites, and legal* music services).
That's about all most people do with a computer anyway.
*Legal implies neither moral nor immoral. It means only legal.
You realize how dumb they'd sound if they did so, after all the years of anti-Linux and anti-OSS rhetoric?
"Yes, we used to fight open source, but, ah well, it's not that evil, it's really useful...just buy Microsoft Linux though and a Shared Source license, so OSS companies can't go after profits on it...."
What was the point of that little straw man?
If possible, I would gladly support something that removed either sexual desire or sexual pleasure when children are involved. But that's impossible (with present technology). Removing children, as you suggest, is stupid, for it destroys our species. We could imprison sex offenders, but that costs too much on our prisons and taxpayers and leaves room for abuse there (the classic 18-year-old/17-year-old anecdote). So one thing that we can try to remove is the capitalist demand for child abuse for monetary, not sexual, reasons. And thus we try. How is it worse to try than not?
Feeling and emotion are artificial constructs that evolution created to encourage us to survive, in this case, to have sex. Would you have sex if it were neither meaningful nor pleasurable, but gave you kids, even whom you didn't love?
Unfortunately, the emotion was attached to the act of sex, not to the birth. This worked before birth control. If the population falls enough due to an abnormal births/mating ratio, perhaps we will see emotions and feeling eventually react.
Because the point of sex is kids. Biologically, the reason sexual reproduction evolved is for more diversity in the gene pool, and thus more ability to survive, and the purpose of any species is just to perpetuate itself.
I do not believe that child porn creates all child abuse, just that it creates some of it. The word "industry" I used specifies a way of making a profit. I don't suppose kids pay to be abused?
I repeat: if there is no way of making a profit, there is lesser reason to continue the action. This is the converse of the capitalist thesis. Yes, there are, shall we say, other reasons for child abuse (the same reasons that make people pay for child porn), but I don't see an easy way to remove those benefits. Money is the one thing the government has easy control over.
The "sorry shlub"s comprise the market. If there's no money in child pr0n, there's no need to continue the industry. Yes, it is impossible to remove the market, but it can be cut significantly, with direct arrests and just fear of arrest.
During this time, a paediatrician was hounded out of her home and forced to move because people incorrectly associated her job title with paedophilia.
After Marc Antony's "Friends, Romans, countrymen" speech which incited the mob:
Third Citizen: Your name, sir, truly.
Cinna the Poet: Truly, my name is Cinna.
First Citizen: Tear him to pieces; he's a conspirator.
Cinna the Poet: I am Cinna the poet, I am Cinna the poet.
Fourth Citizen: Tear him for his bad verses, tear him for his bad verses.
Cinna the Poet: I am not Cinna the conspirator.
Fourth Citizen: It is no matter, his name's Cinna; pluck but his name out of his heart, and turn him going.
-William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar III.3
Uproot?
That's the extent of Tanenbaum's achievenemts.
I guess the canonical books that my mom uses to teach (and, when I was in preschool, learn) operating systems design and other CS topics are not to his credit?
I was not being fair or unfair to Microsoft. I was being neutral, which is a good strategy when trying to inform, not debate. Actually, the focus here is on AdTI, Tanenbaum, and MINIX/Linux, not MS or SCO, so I compressed that part.
Maybe I was incorrect, but you have not informed me where. From what I have heard, MS bought QDOS, based on CP/M. I assume they modified it. Then they licensed it to IBM. I still do not see how this was something I was wrongly "fair" to. Maybe it was morally wrong to most people or to you, but businesswise it was brilliant.
Tanenbaum wrote MINIX, an operating system that was mildly popular in the days Linux was getting started. Tanenbaum and Torvalds had a famous debate on OS design and the like between MINIX and Linux.
Ken Brown is employed by the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute, a firm that some Slashdotters speculate is in the pay of SCO, MS, or the ilk, and is trying to find criticisms against Linux, recently making the claim that Torvalds did not write Linux, which is probably too open to interpretation. Torvalds wrote Linux to the extent that he typed it, but he did built on prior work, just like everyone else. Even Microsoft originally bought all rights to DOS from a third party and modified and licensed it to IBM for their contract.
(At least, this is what I myself have gleaned from Slashdot. Some detail is probably wrong.)
Hm. Lynx on eMacs...déjà vu anyone?
WTF? Manager or lawyer? A voluntary church youth choir?
Oh. You mean God?
Apple can be seen as a generic term - in fact, I would be completely legal if I ripped off a brand sticker from an apple (the fruit) and stuck it on my PC. Then it would be "apple-labeled". Does capitalization have any weight in court?
Yes. Buying rights to listen to music is not buying all rights to the music. Bill Gates payed a lot more than 99 cents for full rights for "Start Me Up" (regardless of whether you think it was worth it). Apple was sued for a lot more than 99c when it used Eminem's song in an ad without what he felt was necessary permission.
People, if you want to fight DRM, etc. there's only one way. Raise millions of dollars somehow, buy a song, and then distribute it freely. Or most likely don't, because you too will feel the need to be repaid some.
The most recent MP3s I listened to were of my church's youth choir, of which I am a part. And yes, I started singing along my part.
Incidentally, since I am one of the artists, what are my legal rights with respect to distributing the MP3s without asking permission of the choir director (or, worse, the entire choir)? We are unpaid, but the mini-orchestra that accompanied us was. And the CD was of course not free.
Didn't the files get distributed (copied) to your computer? Making further use of that copy is copyright violation.
It's like if you had software you rented for $5 a month. If you stopped paying but continued using, you would be liable for breach of contract and copyright violation - your "right" to "copy" was contingent upon your payment. Simply because you were earlier authorized to copy and use the software, it doesn't mean you are perpetually authorized to use one copy that you aren't copying any more.
Dante Alighieri wrote The Inferno, of course, but he also wrote a book called La Vita Nuova , "The New Life", a poetic expression of his love for Beatrice.
The organization that released Inferno is thus called Vita Nuova.
Deprecated, not depreciated. Depreciation means a gradual loss in value, as with your industrial machinery. Deprecation means someone important says that this is instantly not to be used anymore, as with Windows 95. ;-)
With the number of moderators who have better things to do than seek out comments at 1 or 2 (with Karma-Bonus), we'll see the same posts go to 15, and no posts at 4 or 3 due to lack of moderation points. We may even get fewer posts going to 15, in which case we get a less diverse question pool. Don't expect to see a range between 7 and 15 for the top questions.
However, a public vote for 1-2 favorite questions where the n questions with the most votes are forwarded is probably the same idea, but may work without messing up moderation. (Moderation is like the Social Security of Slashdot; you don't touch it for fear of breaking the parts of it that do work.)
What was stolen from them was the hiddenness of their code, their ability to depend on its closed-source nature to avoid people looking at the code to create exploits, possibly the marketability of the routers, and their reputation for security. It's a linguistic convenience to state that the code was stolen rather than the byproducts of the code were stolen - or more accurately, annulled, since the theives don't have that either. Much as looking at a computer = looking at its monitor, or a person chewing = their mouth chewing, IP stolen = its use stolen.