Is it? 2% is just 2%, it doesn't matter if it means 1, 240 million dollars, it is *still* 2%.
The reason why they would move to avoid paying 2% is because they are greedy, not because 1, 240 million dollars is too much because it is still 2%.
Are you telling me that rising taxing 2% for poor people isn't a big deal because those are just a couple hundred dollars? I assure you that 2% means every bit as much to them than to corporations, if not much more.
So it's not a case of 2% of 62E12USD being too much, it's just that giving back 2% to those that defend the country where they operate is too much for them.
If a few cumulative hours over the years is the price for not having system updates maliciously disable functions of my media player then I'd say It's a bargain.
Car analogy: diaspora said they were going to make a car that works better than a Toyota. They produced something with no doors, no locks, which gets 2 miles to the gallon, and which has the tendency to explode if you get too close to other cars.
Because they said they'd built that car out of cheerios and succeeded, and now you know that you can build a car out of cheerios, you can work on improving it you're basically Ignoring what I said..
despite it having demonstrably worse security and privacy controls - the very reason for its existence! - than facebook.
The reason for it's existence is basically open sourcing facebook, and not just facebook the product but facebook the phenomenon. *This* is what it's at stake here and why it's worth trying and trying again.
While I agree that Diaspora should have been built with security from the start, you are misunderstanding his point.
When one says that Diaspora needed to prove that it could be done, it doesn't mean that "it could be done by someone" it means "it could be done by Diaspora". It's different:
Finding out if it's possible at all is useful to decide if you want to invest in building it. Finding out if it's possible for Diaspora is useful to decide if you want to invest in building it out of Diaspora's codebase.
Twin berettas for me, although being an engineer the automatic turrets do most of the work while I sleep, they aren't hard to build from the spare parts available in your average basement, specially if you wait long enough for good parts to be dumped.
More like savants' routers are stuck in a single configuration (RTFA) "maths" but I'm sure the phenomenon is much more complex (also, look around you!)
6ky is still the higher bound for the existence of human civilization, which can be proved to be much older than that by about a zillion different pieces of evidence so indeed, the bible gets it wrong from the first book onwards.
And it doesn't matter how vague you get with time periods you can't get Earth before stars unless you are perfectly happy to throw logic out of the window. For you, for the primitive Hebrews it was easy to imaging this nearly infinite Earth being much older than those little fireflies flying above the clouds up there.
It's not a weakness specifically related to concrete, you are misunderstanding the relationship between iPads and concrete, think "Batman" not "Superman".
Now answer this, which one has a better chance of survival against a micrometeorite impact, and iPad or a military grade tablet?
This wasn't a ground breaking prophecy back then, the Romans subjected the Jews to trade restrictions (citation missing) it was only extrapolation that the devil would extend that to all nations.
Sort of, Assange reputation has been smeared in the mind of the braindead fucks who would judge a person because the words "rape" and "Assange" intersect.
Pretty much anyone who actually reads the articles can find that the allegations are just that, allegations, and that the entire procedure has been highly irregular. The combination of an irregular procedure raised on whimsical allegations immediately after Assange didn't fold to the demands of the US Government pretty much vindicates and even validates his work.
A Streisand's effect of sorts, Assange's reputation is higher than ever in his field of work, at this point I don't think any of both Assange's detractors and potential allies doubt a word he says.
Right now the question is not if Assange raped anybody, the question is, couldn't this be a deliberate attempt from the US Goverment to catch whistle-blowers?
Assange is a kind of whistle-blower messiah by now and every fudged attempt to discredit him only makes him stronger.
One could assume that if he really was an enemy of the US Gov, they'd have him eliminated by now.
But I'm following Hanlon's razor and assume he's not.
I'm not sure durable and iPad belong in the same sentence without a negative, you are looking for something more like this: http://www.ruggedtabletpc.com/
What? Still trying to blame government for monopolization? Don't you people ever get tired/smart?
*sigh* I don't deny that the gov can create monopolies that's obvious, the problem is that monopolies are intrinsic to capitalism and trying to blame all monopolies on government only makes you look like a child, a shill, an idiot or a combination of above.
Deals get done in a regulation free environment, plenty in fact. That McNasty Co. will still get a deal with that free market school, ditto with ingredient suppliers, McNasty doesn't need to out the ingredients of Goodie Co. just make exclusive deals (MS and OEMs serve as a example).
Also you forgot to mention McNasty is also very cheap and bring me some bullshit that Googdie Co. is both the cheapest and tastier provider, you never get both of those, so Goodie Co. probably can't compete in price, at most you get two tiers a high and a low end tier (Apple/MS isn't it?).
That is until McNasty starts to really lean on the budget, cutting cost by using unhealthy production methods, no regulation baby! People won't find out until 10 years later their children start getting born without brains. *Then* can people start inquiring so then can vote with their wallet in the only righteous way available.
Mean while Goodie Co. will also start cutting down prices by exploiting people in sweatshops (Remember Apple-Foxconn?) in fact there's lot's of nasty stuff Goodie Co can do and still sell better tasting hot dogs than McNasty.
One thing is true, McNasty is bigger so it sells in places that Goodie Co. they can afford to launch a line of tasty dogs too. In fact McNasty can have a cheap, healthy and tasty lines leaving Goodie Co with no slice of the cake. But that's ok McNasty is serving the needs of the public, until Goodie Co exhausts it's capital and either goes bankrupt or gets sold, then McNasty will be the only player in town and can do whatever they want until the next Goodie Co needs to be stomped upon.
And where is the next Goodie Co going to come from? Pop&Mom's Hot Dogs of course can't get the deals and connections McNasty has got. No, your best choices will probably be Big Movies Inc. or Generic Motors (hot dogs division).
With or without governments capitalism gravitates to small oligopolies at best and monopolies at worst.
"Mono and the patents it depends on are licensed under several open source licenses"
If you mean "Mono is licensed under several open source licenses" than thats probably true. But I haven't been presented with "open source [sic] licenses" for.NET patents, all I've found, and all.NET shills have presented me with, is the "promise not to sue" with very limited scope and blobs of small prints that I neither want nor have to read.
Groklaw, the EFF and the FSF already read them for me and they say it's not safe and why. Let the professionals do their work.
They could ONLY sue for infringement *after* they withdrew their support.
So? That's enough to give a huge punch to open source.
Although, as you say, they can't revise history and sue you for your past infringement, they can start charging royalties for the continued distribution of infringing software.
This doesn't just affect new forks but Mono as well since they never really had a license to use the patents in the first place.
To reiterate, if MS granted an irrevocable royalty-free license over these patents, Mono (but not later derivatives) would be protected forever.
But MS never gave Mono license to use it's patents, which they could have done easily, but rather "promised not to sue", technically Mono *is* infringing on MS rights, it's just that MS barred itself from enforcing them (for the purpose of implementing.NET, you can't use the patents for anything else like a non compatible derivate, for instance, a VM for a new language).
This is not just a gray area, it's a white room with the light switch on MS hands.
Estoppal can be worked around, easily, sell patents to troll/puppet, have puppet do the suing. Easy as cake, there are not provisions against this. Or well there are, it's called granting licenses, which MS hasn't done about c#/.net
How to break your legally binding promises -- the legal way:
1. Never outright license. 2. Only promise not to sue... 2.1. Over patents you control. 3. Sell patents to patent troll and/or puppet company. 3.1. Voilà you no longer control the patents 4. Set us up the patent bomb. 5. Profit
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think Apple remembers what desperation feels like. ;)
Apple fanboys apparently know it well enough.
because an extra 2% on $62BN is ENORMOUS.
Is it? 2% is just 2%, it doesn't matter if it means 1, 240 million dollars, it is *still* 2%.
The reason why they would move to avoid paying 2% is because they are greedy, not because 1, 240 million dollars is too much because it is still 2%.
Are you telling me that rising taxing 2% for poor people isn't a big deal because those are just a couple hundred dollars? I assure you that 2% means every bit as much to them than to corporations, if not much more.
So it's not a case of 2% of 62E12USD being too much, it's just that giving back 2% to those that defend the country where they operate is too much for them.
Sigh, true but nothing as sever as Apple disabling specific user extensions in iTunes.
I've used pidgin for over a decade when it was called GAIM, what's your point?
If a few cumulative hours over the years is the price for not having system updates maliciously disable functions of my media player then I'd say It's a bargain.
Are you trolling?
Car analogy: diaspora said they were going to make a car that works better than a Toyota. They produced something with no doors, no locks, which gets 2 miles to the gallon, and which has the tendency to explode if you get too close to other cars.
Because they said they'd built that car out of cheerios and succeeded, and now you know that you can build a car out of cheerios, you can work on improving it you're basically Ignoring what I said..
despite it having demonstrably worse security and privacy controls - the very reason for its existence! - than facebook.
The reason for it's existence is basically open sourcing facebook, and not just facebook the product but facebook the phenomenon. *This* is what it's at stake here and why it's worth trying
and trying again.
While I agree that Diaspora should have been built with security from the start, you are misunderstanding his point.
When one says that Diaspora needed to prove that it could be done, it doesn't mean that "it could be done by someone" it means "it could be done by Diaspora". It's different:
Finding out if it's possible at all is useful to decide if you want to invest in building it.
Finding out if it's possible for Diaspora is useful to decide if you want to invest in building it out of Diaspora's codebase.
It's just because we lack -1 Woosh
Twin berettas for me, although being an engineer the automatic turrets do most of the work while I sleep, they aren't hard to build from the spare parts available in your average basement, specially if you wait long enough for good parts to be dumped.
More like savants' routers are stuck in a single configuration (RTFA) "maths" but I'm sure the phenomenon is much more complex (also, look around you!)
I gather you are a dynamic languages guy.
6ky is still the higher bound for the existence of human civilization, which can be proved to be much older than that by about a zillion different pieces of evidence so indeed, the bible gets it wrong from the first book onwards.
And it doesn't matter how vague you get with time periods you can't get Earth before stars unless you are perfectly happy to throw logic out of the window. For you, for the primitive Hebrews it was easy to imaging this nearly infinite Earth being much older than those little fireflies flying above the clouds up there.
It's not a weakness specifically related to concrete, you are misunderstanding the relationship between iPads and concrete, think "Batman" not "Superman".
Now answer this, which one has a better chance of survival against a micrometeorite impact, and iPad or a military grade tablet?
This wasn't a ground breaking prophecy back then, the Romans subjected the Jews to trade restrictions (citation missing) it was only extrapolation that the devil would extend that to all nations.
On the contrary, in space things can fall in every way. But you can argue astronauts are very careful.
Sort of, Assange reputation has been smeared in the mind of the braindead fucks who would judge a person because the words "rape" and "Assange" intersect.
Pretty much anyone who actually reads the articles can find that the allegations are just that, allegations, and that the entire procedure has been highly irregular. The combination of an irregular procedure raised on whimsical allegations immediately after Assange didn't fold to the demands of the US Government pretty much vindicates and even validates his work.
A Streisand's effect of sorts, Assange's reputation is higher than ever in his field of work, at this point I don't think any of both Assange's detractors and potential allies doubt a word he says.
Right now the question is not if Assange raped anybody, the question is, couldn't this be a deliberate attempt from the US Goverment to catch whistle-blowers?
Assange is a kind of whistle-blower messiah by now and every fudged attempt to discredit him only makes him stronger.
One could assume that if he really was an enemy of the US Gov, they'd have him eliminated by now.
But I'm following Hanlon's razor and assume he's not.
I'm not sure durable and iPad belong in the same sentence without a negative, you are looking for something more like this: http://www.ruggedtabletpc.com/
Woosh, he's saying he doesn't have any friends.
What? Still trying to blame government for monopolization? Don't you people ever get tired/smart?
*sigh* I don't deny that the gov can create monopolies that's obvious, the problem is that monopolies are intrinsic to capitalism and trying to blame all monopolies on government only makes you look like a child, a shill, an idiot or a combination of above.
Deals get done in a regulation free environment, plenty in fact. That McNasty Co. will still get a deal with that free market school, ditto with ingredient suppliers, McNasty doesn't need to out the ingredients of Goodie Co. just make exclusive deals (MS and OEMs serve as a example).
Also you forgot to mention McNasty is also very cheap and bring me some bullshit that Googdie Co. is both the cheapest and tastier provider, you never get both of those, so Goodie Co. probably can't compete in price, at most you get two tiers a high and a low end tier (Apple/MS isn't it?).
That is until McNasty starts to really lean on the budget, cutting cost by using unhealthy production methods, no regulation baby! People won't find out until 10 years later their children start getting born without brains. *Then* can people start inquiring so then can vote with their wallet in the only righteous way available.
Mean while Goodie Co. will also start cutting down prices by exploiting people in sweatshops (Remember Apple-Foxconn?) in fact there's lot's of nasty stuff Goodie Co can do and still sell better tasting hot dogs than McNasty.
One thing is true, McNasty is bigger so it sells in places that Goodie Co. they can afford to launch a line of tasty dogs too. In fact McNasty can have a cheap, healthy and tasty lines leaving Goodie Co with no slice of the cake. But that's ok McNasty is serving the needs of the public, until Goodie Co exhausts it's capital and either goes bankrupt or gets sold, then McNasty will be the only player in town and can do whatever they want until the next Goodie Co needs to be stomped upon.
And where is the next Goodie Co going to come from? Pop&Mom's Hot Dogs of course can't get the deals and connections McNasty has got. No, your best choices will probably be Big Movies Inc. or Generic Motors (hot dogs division).
With or without governments capitalism gravitates to small oligopolies at best and monopolies at worst.
I prefer the term secular values.
"Mono and the patents it depends on are licensed under several open source licenses"
If you mean "Mono is licensed under several open source licenses" than thats probably true. But I haven't been presented with "open source [sic] licenses" for .NET patents, all I've found, and all .NET shills have presented me with, is the "promise not to sue" with very limited scope and blobs of small prints that I neither want nor have to read.
Groklaw, the EFF and the FSF already read them for me and they say it's not safe and why. Let the professionals do their work.
Scheme. Lisp is to Scheme as Perl is to Python. Multiple name spaces, line noise operators etc.
They could ONLY sue for infringement *after* they withdrew their support.
So? That's enough to give a huge punch to open source.
Although, as you say, they can't revise history and sue you for your past infringement, they can start charging royalties for the continued distribution of infringing software.
This doesn't just affect new forks but Mono as well since they never really had a license to use the patents in the first place.
To reiterate, if MS granted an irrevocable royalty-free license over these patents, Mono (but not later derivatives) would be protected forever.
But MS never gave Mono license to use it's patents, which they could have done easily, but rather "promised not to sue", technically Mono *is* infringing on MS rights, it's just that MS barred itself from enforcing them (for the purpose of implementing .NET, you can't use the patents for anything else like a non compatible derivate, for instance, a VM for a new language).
This is not just a gray area, it's a white room with the light switch on MS hands.
Estoppal can be worked around, easily, sell patents to troll/puppet, have puppet do the suing. Easy as cake, there are not provisions against this. Or well there are, it's called granting licenses, which MS hasn't done about c#/.net
How to break your legally binding promises -- the legal way:
1. Never outright license.
2. Only promise not to sue...
2.1. Over patents you control.
3. Sell patents to patent troll and/or puppet company.
3.1. Voilà you no longer control the patents
4. Set us up the patent bomb.
5. Profit
There not even a fucking mystery "????" here.