The analogy to be drawn could be something akin to people hiding a radio, guns, Jews, or Resistance Partisans in their house in occupied territory during WWII, or a spy situation (or an Axis living in Allied or Neutral territory cause it goes the other way around as well, of course). Yes, less radical because people don't get murdered in this situation but the point is the same: you stick up your neck for the freedom or life of others [often whom you don't know] and you are the one who gets the heat in the name of protecting something/someone because a very small part of those you stick your neck out for 'betray' the freedom you provide which leads to 'dogs of war' coming after you.
This can happen to anyone who runs a Tor exit nodes although I bet there are countries where the threatment you receive would be worse. Let this be a conscious warning to Tor exit nodes administrators. If you do not wish to stand for similar heat, don't join 'em. And, the JAP/BKA story is old, and was stupid on JAP's side because BKA has no legal ground to backdoor your server without your consent.
I remember that in past I was asked if I wanted to upgrade to a newer Windows Update. The newer Windows Update was required to get several important newer updates but nevertheless I was ased about updating WU.
Here is a ruleset for PF (BSD firewall). Adapt it to your PF.conf accordingly.
Granted, I see some advantages to the bigger iPods -- lots of storage is a good thing, and halfway decent battery life likewise. But the smaller ones? Just because it's branded "Apple"?
For several years I've been a happy user of an Iriver H340 laughing at the side line at all the iPod fanatics. My player costed approx 300 EUR and it has 40 GB storage (HDD based obviously). It plays music for about 16 hours, and Rockbox works. Its user-friendly in use although probably not "good enough" for many clueless users. Oh, and it plays OGG Vorbis.
I'll switch to whatever IM first supports Yahoo Messenger Java games. Its one of the few features I need because my girlfriend and me are living far away from each other (for now) and we'd like to play Literati via Yahoo every now and then. Only the official Yahoo Messenger for Windows or a browser + Java allow this. For other IM I use Bitlbee as its lightweight and has all the features I need.
I hate this 'rule of thumb' that people keep trotting out that we only use x% of software, for some low value of 'x'. That's simply not true, so stop bringing it up like it's a valid argument for anything.
Thats why my hardware is either 99% idle or ancient while yours is working its ass off. Thats why I'm not distracted by all kind of bells and whistles. Its also why sometimes I lack compatibility because my non-bloated apps aren't in sync with the popular, bloated apps.
I keep hearing this bullshit if from Unix zealots, from people flogging 'thin' or 'web 2.0' products, and from Luddites that are 'perfectly happy' running WordPerfect 5.1 on their OS/2 machine.
Don't you ever get in contact with people who used an Amiga. Don't. Ever.
Lets think of a simple scenario. Imagine a fictional company MiniSoft Software that makes a word processor. They advertise that their program has 100 features! Of course, you know that most users will only use about 10% of that most of the time, and maybe an occasional 1% rarely. So why have the other 89 features in there? Most users won't be using it!
If the mere option to have the 89 features isn't neccessary, MiniSoft Software would be wise to make a lite version of their word processor for 1) less cost (for non-FLOSS) 2) less bloat. This means more happy customers. Their software runs faster, requires less hardware, and it costs less too. They will probably sell more licenses (depends a bit on the market etc), and customers might later upgrade to a more full-fledged version (which upgrade MiniSoft Software provides in a slick way, ofcourse)
Glenda in marketing might use the 'mail merge' feature once a month. The payroll officer might have to use the database integration feature. The warehouse manager might be using the barcode printing. The international sales office might use the Unicode multi-lingual features.
They might? No, at work, they either should or they should not. If they should its part of their job and they have the feature in their software (or hardware). If they should not the feature doesn't need to be there either. They don't decide; their employer does. And if you're self-employed and always wasting money/time on new bells and whistles or 'because they might be useful' then you're not doing a good job no matter how much you earn.
Mind you that 'because they might be useful' is different than an analysis on whether they'll be used after which its decided to include or exclude. Others do this for us (software corporations, OEM vendors, heck even hardware manufacturers e.g. prime example: mainboard manufacturers) but not always correct (MS Office...). When was the last time you used LPT1 or RS232 on your current mainboard? Here the reason is backwards compatibility; a common reason for bloat.
This reasoning is not limited to software.
Once you add up all of those '1%' pieces, all too often, you end up with... 100 features or so.
No, its due to indecisiveness. "Oh, this may be useful." "Hey, lets add that people might need it." Go read any usability analysis and you'll see users don't need features they don't... *gasp* need and too many options are intimidating. Give users a bloat-free, fast introduction and allow them a very good manual and learning curve to the 'advanced' features. Its similar as growing up, you know? Or did you start writing thesis at age 2? No, first you learned to cry, shit, walk, blabber, read, write, maths, language, and so on.
Because somewhere, out there, there's someone who uses the macro functionality, or the right-to-left text input, or the dynamic forms, or... something. It's not bloat... it's what users expect from their software -- that the same consistent product be useful for all of the staff in an entire business.
Hegemony (and backwards compatibility; which you failed to mention, and
Because they COULD be doing something naughty and we wouldn't find out until after the fact. It's not because they ARE doing something naughty nor because we EXPECT them to do something naughty. (we don't)
Run a packet sniffer or sniff through the code. Whats the difference? I can run a packet sniffer, but looking through Firefox spaghetti is a different beast. Besides, many people cannot do either. Whats the worth of able to run a packet sniffer or having the source code to them? Nada. They have to trust others to do so. Thats why the argument of having the source doesn't make sense to most mortals!
The real surprise was that IE 6.0 performed better than Firefox 2.0.0.6 in 2 of the 3 benchmarks.
Not really. Versions before IE7 are all pretty fast. Often, they (seem to be) faster than Mozilla SeaMonkey/Firefox and dare I say Netscape. IE7 however is quite a bit slower than IE6.
If the courts find this to be the case, then they'll have to pay. My guess is that they'll settle long before then, however, because Sun really looks bad here. When their own engineers publicly acknowledge that they knowingly copied patented ideas from WAFL, it seems like they're in a rather weak position. But IANAL. (and neither are you...)
Good point.
This has nothing to do with the CDDL.
The CDDL provides patent protection(s). I wonder if/how they'd kick in in this situation or even if they would.
Huh?
I was thinking about a situation where patents apply on this code while software patents have no legal merrit in the EU. I was wondering if I, as EU citizen, would then still be allowed to run the in-the-US infringing code.
It's hard to slow something down that doesn't appear to be moving.
However, Sun has not been willing to license their ZFS-related patents under anything other than the CDDL
Untrue.
A few months ago before GPLv3 was finalized Sun was willing to release OpenSolaris (which includes ZFS) under GPLv3. Sun liked those prototypes of GPLv3. I don't remember exactly why Sun liked GPLv3 prototypes but IIRC it was especially the patent-related excerpts which the CDDL has, too. Now that GPLv3 is released I don't know what the plans are either.
Some parts of ZFS are released under GPLv2 due to being included in GRUB.
So, this could have both positive and implications for linux. It would be nice to see a technology like ZFS incorporated in linux - a good percentage of my drive space is unused due to an inability to evenly map it across RAID-5 partitions in a way that won't harm disk access times (my drives aren't all of identical size, and I also have boot/swap/root partitions to squeeze in someplace that won't use RAID-5).
I suggest FreeBSD instead. Unlike (Open)Solaris it comes with loads of software, good hardware support, and good Linux compatibility. Their ZFS implementation is almost fully complete, and ofcourse it is compatible with OpenSolaris its ZFS. NetBSD recently released RC1 of their 4.0 tree, and they're also on porting ZFS to NetBSD via Google SoC. MacOSX I don't know about, seems Apple cares for snapshots feature and will deliver read-only in Leopard. FUSE (on Linux) is slower and incomplete, but compatible and has the advantage its userland hence not crashing your whole system if ZFS fails. Alternatively, simply use JBOD if your drives aren't all same size. With proper backups you'll be fine.
It's also alledged, in the filing, that NetApp is more concerned about the fact that Sun is giving away ZFS and its snapshot IP, which NetApp claims are its own. NetApp was OK with letting ZFS use this technology, but not with Sun giving it away to everyone else via OpenSolaris.
Alleged. What if Sun infringes patents? How would this affect the CDDL? In Europe? The FUD created probably slows ZFS adoption at least in the US.
Yes, chances raise, but so do chances raise if you meet an irresponsible driver, or if you never drove while having one beer of alcohol in your blood and then you do or have to. Not keeping enough distance is one (if not the) primary cause of accidents -- at least here. If you're a responsible driver, and had a beer, your response time lowers hence your break time increases hence you should keep slightly more distance (I'd opt for at least 25 meters). If you're German you surely drove on the German highways and know this distance aspect from there too. In any case, it is always important to scan and keep distance. In some situations its even more important. Someone who is consious and has experience with having one beer while driving knows this (I do NOT advocate people should drive with alcohol in their blood; but I advocate keeping the option open).
My girlfriend always drives after a few sips of beer (because it alleviates her chronic pain) so she is used to it. There are pills which cause drowsiness too which also contain COX-2 inhibitors but they work far less well. In general she drives more careful than others drivers, and I'd say that people who drive very slow through rain because they are scared are also pretty dangerous (because of the speed differences). What I noticed in her country is that people seem to drive really as if they're dull and stupid... and I've seen some utterly stupid things happen. The government can also do a lot to the safety of the system. For example, my drive instructor is member of VVN (veilig verkeer netherlands; secure driving netherlands) who give advice to the (local) government on safety regards (ie. general rules, situations which should be different, and so on). We regularly talk about several situations.
Reality however has slightly different rules because there will be situations where you will have to push yourself under the limit or situations where you drank a few glasses. For the record, I'm not talking about being drunk here, this is clearly not the argument. I highly suggest people to drive drunk (artificially with glasses, or with real alcohol) on a test course (yes, a test course) together with a drive instructor. However I'm pretty sure such is not proposed by the US government or the States, and from what I've heard its incredibly easy to get a drivers license in the US. In my country (The Netherlands) its a lot harder and you learn driving only with a drive instructor who can control the car as well, but that is all for very good reasons.
I'm pretty pro 'no alcohol' but 'zero tolerance' is the laughable other extremity. A good goal it is, but it won't be always possible. In my opinion, if we educate the youth we educate the elder whereas the youth often lack experience and aren't able to do risk analysis. So, it is for example important to educate the youth to learn to say 'no' and have one of the folks of your group absolutely clean (usually includes other drugs too), but there are people who actually _can_ win the game of having a few beers because they're good drivers. This is why people in my country (The Netherlands) get through an extensive driver license course which costs a lot of money (approx 1000-2000 EUR depending on various factors). Those who get a new drivers license get a beginners drivers license for 5 years where they're allowed to have = 0,2 promile alcohol in their blood. This is equal to less than one glass of alcoholic beverage in appropriate glass. They also get a 'points' drivers license where each offense regarding driving rules gets points, besides the fine. Too many points == license lost. After 5 years, 0,5 promile alcohol is allowed. Then, they're at least 23 years old, and probably gained a lot of driving experience (not to be underestimated!) and have experience having 0,2 promile alcohol in blood.
Also, in The Netherlands we've had those breathalyzer apparatus for ages. In fact, I've never seen anyone having to walk a line here. We use breath out, the thing calculates, and its done. There is a legal margin (just like with speeding) which is automatically substracted and the thing will say "OK" or "not OK". You're done in 30 seconds, the cops are friendly (if you are too) and explain how it works, and you only lose a few minutes. Ofcourse they don't check daily on the same spots that'd be irritating. Also, the mouths on which you breath are one-time use, and they provide them for you.
PS: Of importance is that beer contains COX-2 inhibitors which alleviate pain. For some people thats very important. It alleviates pain. If you're used to driving one or two beers which alleviate your pain I can guarantee you chances are high you'll drive safer than sober with pain...
I know I'm going to be torn apart limb by limb by the modders out there, but yes, you're right. The hard limit isn't really the point. Do you think people are suddenly dangerous over 0.05 (or whatever the limit is in your neck of the woods)? The point is that you've been drinking before you've been driving, and you really shouldn't have been doing that. That's what the law is intended to do: to stop you from driving after good night out. It's negligent, it's potentially dangerous, and it sets a bad example for others. If you're really only 0.04, the limit's 0.05, and you read over it, I'm sorry that such a miscarriage of justice happened. However, it really wasn't a good idea to drive in the first place, now was it?
What the law intends to do in this case is not to stop you from driving after you after good night out. What the law intends to do is set a limit of tolerable alcohol in your blood; in this case its zero tolerenace. Whether that is a good limit or not is up to debate; I, for one, beg to differ.
First of all there is the issue of alcohol leaving the bloodstream. The speed of this differs, but what I've learned is the following: approx one glass is removed after 1,5 hours. So if you've been a heavy drinker last night you might still have alcohol in your bloodstream the next morning. I'm sure you're able to see the problem this creates with a zero tolerenace rule?
Now, the some people can be stoned while driving (some drive better then because they have less chronic pain) while others cannot. Some people can have a little bit of alcohol (I'm not talking about 'drunk' here), others cannot. Some people can read a map while driving while others cannot. Some people can have a conversation while driving, others cannot. Some people can listen to music while driving while others cannot. Some people can have a blowjob while driving, others cannot. Some people can use (certain) medications while driving while others cannot. Some laws in some countries/states allow a little bit of alcohol, some don't. And so on, and so on. Did I mention using your silly cellphone?
You are first and foremost responsible for your own safety, but you should do the best to secure the safety of other drivers as well. This is the core of issue. The law just tries to force people's behaviour and if the law is alcohol == fine then that is pretty childish IMO, and even dangerous because there WILL be times where you will have alcohol in your blood and have to drive. What if your kid suddenly becomes ill? What if an accident happens? There are tons of scenarios possible while you had one glass of wine with your dinner (according to some diets a very healthy way of living). According to your extreme limit you're not allowed to drive. Had you driven with one glass of one in your blood before you'd be a safe driver; have you never done this before you're less safe, and with stress like in the mentioned examples surely the risks of driving are higher.
In the Netherlands some (the better, like the one I'm following called RIS) driver license courses will teach you real-life situations like driving & breaking in heavy rain. One of those courses is driving with special glasses which are similar to having drank 8 glasses of beer. After you got your drivers license, you get a beginners drivers license for 5 years. Beginners allowed to have 0,2 promile alcohol in your blood which is less than a glass of beer. Non-beginners are allowed to have 0,5 promile in their blood. You're allowed to have a drivers license once you're age 18 or higher. So this counts for any youth younger than 22. Driving under influence of other drugs (e.g. THC, MDMA) is not allowed and the police have since begin 2007 the legal ability to test you for other drugs should they suspect you're under the influence of drugs.
Yes, Opera on Linux uses QT. Opera AG probably gets some nice discounts from Trolltech for their QT licenses. GPL/MPL/whatever has nothing to do with Opera or the fact Opera uses QT. As FreeBSD/AMD64 user, I welcome the 64 bit ports very much. The speed improvements are a nice benefit, too. Centralized bookmarks Netscape had in the functioning of LDAP server support. Nice, but it got cut out of Firefox. Now its back in Opera (and Google made sth like that too) although using different protocols.
How can you conclude based on the whole message you quote its "bad morals"? If you read and understand his whole quote its quite more complicated than that. Nowhere does he use the word "moral" nor "bad moral". This is just your own interpration of his viewpoint. And, guess what? Your interpretation is worth shit. You're just a whining piece of shit much like Theo. This moral aspect was known for many years. Why rehash it? It won't be effective anyway. Hardly anyone in the GPL camp will agree. If anything, they'll be reminded by software such as WINE. (I am not a GPL proponent, btw.)
but I know people who clearly have liberal social values and take drugs and have kinky sex lives who, due to their faith in libertarianism, actually vote Republican because they think it is closer to this libertarian ideal that they have in their minds.
You probably misunderstood their reasoning. They vote on Republican because the other reasonable alternative based on popular vote is Democrat. Hence, the argument is that Republican is more libertarian than Democrat. I've heard this before hence assume its true although I believe this would differ from state to state although I'm not an American and don't know enough about American politics to be able to specify that in detail. What I do know is that this phenomenom is called strategic voting. In EU we have it too, but instead of only 2 parties as option we usually have 3 or 4. The Green (Christian), the Blue (Liberal), and the Red (Socialist). All the other parties have no chance winning. If you ask me, that still sucks horsecocks. E.g. Condorcet or Approval would fix such but its complex and would need the current parties to change the model, or a revolution. If those people you know who have faith in libertarianism they actually voted Libertarian (also a party in the US) then they were probably more truthful voter, but their vote would in the short term (this election/vote) not make any difference on the effective outcome ("who gets to govern this?"). In my country we say 'they chose eggs for their money'. That is, unless they find the Republicans more libertarian than the Libertarians but I highly doubt that.
Definitions aren't everywhere around the world the same. My culture (Dutch) is based on many libertarian principles, but we also have a lot of restrictions (mostly law; some cultural) which limit our liberty directly. The question is often: does the fact we leave others a choice instead of forcing them or disallowing them good for the . So, as you can imagine, sometimes those laws increase our liberty. I disagree with the assessment put in the topic because a libertarian generally would prefer the BSD & MIT license over the GPL because the GPL is far more restrictive.
As for me? I've concluded there isn't a perfect system, and I prefer many of imperfect systems over various other (and current ones). There is no need for me to feel being 'a part' of one of the groups anymore whereas in my youth I've taken part of various of the groups. The same counts for religion. It leaves me a lot liberty not having to pick a religion and I thank my parents not forcing one (theirs; Protestant Christian & Reformed Christian) upon me. The silly reason for that is that they both came from a different Christian corner and wanted to force their own upon me after which my father said: then neither. And do it went.
Its a legal issue and its solved. Now goaway with your petty morals. Clearly, GPL proponents do not agree with the philosophy behind the BSD and OpenBSD is political-free so this hoompha isn't necessary.
OpenBSD Wireless is something the OpenBSD team does really well.
Driver-wise; yes. The other BSDs too, as they're porting the code. Feature-wise OpenBSD does not support WPA2 so you're stuck with plain, WEP or IPsec/AuthPF. The latter is a decent implementation but not all 'hardware' routers support IPsec/AuthPF. While this all isn't driver related it certainly is related to OpenBSD wireless hence I disagree with your assessment. OpenBSD 4.2 is supposed to fix the lack of WPA2 support but by the time that is released other OSes will have catched up with OpenBSD, too. Still, nice pioneering work.
The cpu was barely enough for most tasks and some tasks you didn't even want to do.
Most tasks? WTF does that include? Watching your DVD porn collection? Seriously, I wonder what people expect when they buy a low-end, low-power x86 computer. Its meant for (some) embedded purposes while still having the benefits of x86 architecture (backwards compatibility, portability, familiar platform). For example, together with MythTV you can make a TV recorder from the thing. Or you could jack in another NIC and build a nice, lightweight, low-power firewall smooth in a dedicated case. Tomorow on Slashdot: 'Soekris not powerful enough for Doom3'
As a comparison, I built an Athlon64 power efficient system with normal PC parts (no laptop parts, including the CPU). I clocked down the cpu to 1ghz and with a radeon 7500 video card plus a standard 3.5" 7200 rpm hard disk and a atheros 802.11g pci card, I was able to get it to draw about 46 watts at the plug idle.
Kudos, but that doesn't clear the above one dime, and not all Athlon 64 are equal esp not regarding TDP (but also idle usage). EE, if possible, should be considered.
I've found that when buying PC parts, the hardest part to evaluate for power consumption is the motherboard because there are no specifications that really help you and the amount of parts used on the board vary.
Agreed. This is not well documented, but I found out interesting data on my motherboard on forums dedicated to discussion of low power usage.
Slashdot Mirror
The analogy to be drawn could be something akin to people hiding a radio, guns, Jews, or Resistance Partisans in their house in occupied territory during WWII, or a spy situation (or an Axis living in Allied or Neutral territory cause it goes the other way around as well, of course). Yes, less radical because people don't get murdered in this situation but the point is the same: you stick up your neck for the freedom or life of others [often whom you don't know] and you are the one who gets the heat in the name of protecting something/someone because a very small part of those you stick your neck out for 'betray' the freedom you provide which leads to 'dogs of war' coming after you.
This can happen to anyone who runs a Tor exit nodes although I bet there are countries where the threatment you receive would be worse. Let this be a conscious warning to Tor exit nodes administrators. If you do not wish to stand for similar heat, don't join 'em. And, the JAP/BKA story is old, and was stupid on JAP's side because BKA has no legal ground to backdoor your server without your consent.
Here is a ruleset for PF (BSD firewall). Adapt it to your PF.conf accordingly.
Zonk is just trying to explain us how to buy a digital camera for a tiny amount of money.
Maybe don't use @hotmail.com for sth like Paypal. It doesn't look genuine. Just my opinion. I wish you good luck ofcourse.
"Agreed, but them blocking your ad-blocking browser is't their problem."
('cept government websites/services)
I'll switch to whatever IM first supports Yahoo Messenger Java games. Its one of the few features I need because my girlfriend and me are living far away from each other (for now) and we'd like to play Literati via Yahoo every now and then. Only the official Yahoo Messenger for Windows or a browser + Java allow this. For other IM I use Bitlbee as its lightweight and has all the features I need.
Thats why my hardware is either 99% idle or ancient while yours is working its ass off. Thats why I'm not distracted by all kind of bells and whistles. Its also why sometimes I lack compatibility because my non-bloated apps aren't in sync with the popular, bloated apps.
Don't you ever get in contact with people who used an Amiga. Don't. Ever.
If the mere option to have the 89 features isn't neccessary, MiniSoft Software would be wise to make a lite version of their word processor for 1) less cost (for non-FLOSS) 2) less bloat. This means more happy customers. Their software runs faster, requires less hardware, and it costs less too. They will probably sell more licenses (depends a bit on the market etc), and customers might later upgrade to a more full-fledged version (which upgrade MiniSoft Software provides in a slick way, ofcourse)
They might? No, at work, they either should or they should not. If they should its part of their job and they have the feature in their software (or hardware). If they should not the feature doesn't need to be there either. They don't decide; their employer does. And if you're self-employed and always wasting money/time on new bells and whistles or 'because they might be useful' then you're not doing a good job no matter how much you earn.
Mind you that 'because they might be useful' is different than an analysis on whether they'll be used after which its decided to include or exclude. Others do this for us (software corporations, OEM vendors, heck even hardware manufacturers e.g. prime example: mainboard manufacturers) but not always correct (MS Office...). When was the last time you used LPT1 or RS232 on your current mainboard? Here the reason is backwards compatibility; a common reason for bloat.
This reasoning is not limited to software.
No, its due to indecisiveness. "Oh, this may be useful." "Hey, lets add that people might need it." Go read any usability analysis and you'll see users don't need features they don't... *gasp* need and too many options are intimidating. Give users a bloat-free, fast introduction and allow them a very good manual and learning curve to the 'advanced' features. Its similar as growing up, you know? Or did you start writing thesis at age 2? No, first you learned to cry, shit, walk, blabber, read, write, maths, language, and so on.
Hegemony (and backwards compatibility; which you failed to mention, and
A few months ago before GPLv3 was finalized Sun was willing to release OpenSolaris (which includes ZFS) under GPLv3. Sun liked those prototypes of GPLv3. I don't remember exactly why Sun liked GPLv3 prototypes but IIRC it was especially the patent-related excerpts which the CDDL has, too. Now that GPLv3 is released I don't know what the plans are either.
Some parts of ZFS are released under GPLv2 due to being included in GRUB.I suggest FreeBSD instead. Unlike (Open)Solaris it comes with loads of software, good hardware support, and good Linux compatibility. Their ZFS implementation is almost fully complete, and ofcourse it is compatible with OpenSolaris its ZFS. NetBSD recently released RC1 of their 4.0 tree, and they're also on porting ZFS to NetBSD via Google SoC. MacOSX I don't know about, seems Apple cares for snapshots feature and will deliver read-only in Leopard. FUSE (on Linux) is slower and incomplete, but compatible and has the advantage its userland hence not crashing your whole system if ZFS fails. Alternatively, simply use JBOD if your drives aren't all same size. With proper backups you'll be fine.
Yes, chances raise, but so do chances raise if you meet an irresponsible driver, or if you never drove while having one beer of alcohol in your blood and then you do or have to. Not keeping enough distance is one (if not the) primary cause of accidents -- at least here. If you're a responsible driver, and had a beer, your response time lowers hence your break time increases hence you should keep slightly more distance (I'd opt for at least 25 meters). If you're German you surely drove on the German highways and know this distance aspect from there too. In any case, it is always important to scan and keep distance. In some situations its even more important. Someone who is consious and has experience with having one beer while driving knows this (I do NOT advocate people should drive with alcohol in their blood; but I advocate keeping the option open).
My girlfriend always drives after a few sips of beer (because it alleviates her chronic pain) so she is used to it. There are pills which cause drowsiness too which also contain COX-2 inhibitors but they work far less well. In general she drives more careful than others drivers, and I'd say that people who drive very slow through rain because they are scared are also pretty dangerous (because of the speed differences). What I noticed in her country is that people seem to drive really as if they're dull and stupid... and I've seen some utterly stupid things happen. The government can also do a lot to the safety of the system. For example, my drive instructor is member of VVN (veilig verkeer netherlands; secure driving netherlands) who give advice to the (local) government on safety regards (ie. general rules, situations which should be different, and so on). We regularly talk about several situations.
Reality however has slightly different rules because there will be situations where you will have to push yourself under the limit or situations where you drank a few glasses. For the record, I'm not talking about being drunk here, this is clearly not the argument. I highly suggest people to drive drunk (artificially with glasses, or with real alcohol) on a test course (yes, a test course) together with a drive instructor. However I'm pretty sure such is not proposed by the US government or the States, and from what I've heard its incredibly easy to get a drivers license in the US. In my country (The Netherlands) its a lot harder and you learn driving only with a drive instructor who can control the car as well, but that is all for very good reasons.
I'm pretty pro 'no alcohol' but 'zero tolerance' is the laughable other extremity. A good goal it is, but it won't be always possible. In my opinion, if we educate the youth we educate the elder whereas the youth often lack experience and aren't able to do risk analysis. So, it is for example important to educate the youth to learn to say 'no' and have one of the folks of your group absolutely clean (usually includes other drugs too), but there are people who actually _can_ win the game of having a few beers because they're good drivers. This is why people in my country (The Netherlands) get through an extensive driver license course which costs a lot of money (approx 1000-2000 EUR depending on various factors). Those who get a new drivers license get a beginners drivers license for 5 years where they're allowed to have = 0,2 promile alcohol in their blood. This is equal to less than one glass of alcoholic beverage in appropriate glass. They also get a 'points' drivers license where each offense regarding driving rules gets points, besides the fine. Too many points == license lost. After 5 years, 0,5 promile alcohol is allowed. Then, they're at least 23 years old, and probably gained a lot of driving experience (not to be underestimated!) and have experience having 0,2 promile alcohol in blood.
Also, in The Netherlands we've had those breathalyzer apparatus for ages. In fact, I've never seen anyone having to walk a line here. We use breath out, the thing calculates, and its done. There is a legal margin (just like with speeding) which is automatically substracted and the thing will say "OK" or "not OK". You're done in 30 seconds, the cops are friendly (if you are too) and explain how it works, and you only lose a few minutes. Ofcourse they don't check daily on the same spots that'd be irritating. Also, the mouths on which you breath are one-time use, and they provide them for you.
PS: Of importance is that beer contains COX-2 inhibitors which alleviate pain. For some people thats very important. It alleviates pain. If you're used to driving one or two beers which alleviate your pain I can guarantee you chances are high you'll drive safer than sober with pain...
First of all there is the issue of alcohol leaving the bloodstream. The speed of this differs, but what I've learned is the following: approx one glass is removed after 1,5 hours. So if you've been a heavy drinker last night you might still have alcohol in your bloodstream the next morning. I'm sure you're able to see the problem this creates with a zero tolerenace rule?
Now, the some people can be stoned while driving (some drive better then because they have less chronic pain) while others cannot. Some people can have a little bit of alcohol (I'm not talking about 'drunk' here), others cannot. Some people can read a map while driving while others cannot. Some people can have a conversation while driving, others cannot. Some people can listen to music while driving while others cannot. Some people can have a blowjob while driving, others cannot. Some people can use (certain) medications while driving while others cannot. Some laws in some countries/states allow a little bit of alcohol, some don't. And so on, and so on. Did I mention using your silly cellphone?
You are first and foremost responsible for your own safety, but you should do the best to secure the safety of other drivers as well. This is the core of issue. The law just tries to force people's behaviour and if the law is alcohol == fine then that is pretty childish IMO, and even dangerous because there WILL be times where you will have alcohol in your blood and have to drive. What if your kid suddenly becomes ill? What if an accident happens? There are tons of scenarios possible while you had one glass of wine with your dinner (according to some diets a very healthy way of living). According to your extreme limit you're not allowed to drive. Had you driven with one glass of one in your blood before you'd be a safe driver; have you never done this before you're less safe, and with stress like in the mentioned examples surely the risks of driving are higher.
In the Netherlands some (the better, like the one I'm following called RIS) driver license courses will teach you real-life situations like driving & breaking in heavy rain. One of those courses is driving with special glasses which are similar to having drank 8 glasses of beer. After you got your drivers license, you get a beginners drivers license for 5 years. Beginners allowed to have 0,2 promile alcohol in your blood which is less than a glass of beer. Non-beginners are allowed to have 0,5 promile in their blood. You're allowed to have a drivers license once you're age 18 or higher. So this counts for any youth younger than 22. Driving under influence of other drugs (e.g. THC, MDMA) is not allowed and the police have since begin 2007 the legal ability to test you for other drugs should they suspect you're under the influence of drugs.
Yes, Opera on Linux uses QT. Opera AG probably gets some nice discounts from Trolltech for their QT licenses. GPL/MPL/whatever has nothing to do with Opera or the fact Opera uses QT. As FreeBSD/AMD64 user, I welcome the 64 bit ports very much. The speed improvements are a nice benefit, too. Centralized bookmarks Netscape had in the functioning of LDAP server support. Nice, but it got cut out of Firefox. Now its back in Opera (and Google made sth like that too) although using different protocols.
How can you conclude based on the whole message you quote its "bad morals"? If you read and understand his whole quote its quite more complicated than that. Nowhere does he use the word "moral" nor "bad moral". This is just your own interpration of his viewpoint. And, guess what? Your interpretation is worth shit. You're just a whining piece of shit much like Theo. This moral aspect was known for many years. Why rehash it? It won't be effective anyway. Hardly anyone in the GPL camp will agree. If anything, they'll be reminded by software such as WINE. (I am not a GPL proponent, btw.)
Definitions aren't everywhere around the world the same. My culture (Dutch) is based on many libertarian principles, but we also have a lot of restrictions (mostly law; some cultural) which limit our liberty directly. The question is often: does the fact we leave others a choice instead of forcing them or disallowing them good for the . So, as you can imagine, sometimes those laws increase our liberty. I disagree with the assessment put in the topic because a libertarian generally would prefer the BSD & MIT license over the GPL because the GPL is far more restrictive.
As for me? I've concluded there isn't a perfect system, and I prefer many of imperfect systems over various other (and current ones). There is no need for me to feel being 'a part' of one of the groups anymore whereas in my youth I've taken part of various of the groups. The same counts for religion. It leaves me a lot liberty not having to pick a religion and I thank my parents not forcing one (theirs; Protestant Christian & Reformed Christian) upon me. The silly reason for that is that they both came from a different Christian corner and wanted to force their own upon me after which my father said: then neither. And do it went.
Its a legal issue and its solved. Now goaway with your petty morals. Clearly, GPL proponents do not agree with the philosophy behind the BSD and OpenBSD is political-free so this hoompha isn't necessary.