Why no complaints about Calculator or Notepad? Why no complaints about Hyperterminal?
Because you can easily replace them? Because Microsoft hasn't limited the ability to run other programs, such as Putty?
Why isn't Google complaining about Linux's find?
Because the GNU/Linux developers haven't intentionally hobbled Google's ability to write a search system for GNU/Linux?
Apple is far more anti-competitive than MS? Why doesn't anyone hassle them?
Uhm... how do you mean? Is Apple in a dominant position, and capable of using its dominant position to force others out of business?
This knee-jerk windows hating grows so fucking tiresome and is so transparent it is not even funny.
The thing that grows tiresome for me is watching Microsoft use the same old illegal tricks to put competitors at a disadvantage, rather than competing on merit. (The trick to a "free market" is competing on merit, not market dominance.)
How about taking care of something that matters such as the obvious price fixing in the gasoline market?
Fuck, yeah.
Fucking democratic governments and laws - completely useless and corrupt. But oh, you get the illusion that your vote matters... wake up dipshits, you've been taken for a ride.
The "information wants to be free" and "everything is okay when it's done using technology, but only when it's the people and not corporations or government" arguments can be saved for elsewhere.
Why?
Seriously. Why?
These are relevant points of discussion. I do not place the rights of the corporation above the rights of the individual. In fact, I hold that the rights of the corporation are inferior to the rights of the individual. I ask honestly, does the corporation even have the right to restrict the reporting of *any* individual?
I hold they do not. In our twisted society, of course, it is not only allowed, but encouraged. However, that does not make it *right*.
I don't care how much equipment this guy totes up the side of a mountain while being passed by the couple of thousand other tourists heading up to the summit.
If you use Flash for your website, you lose your geek credentials. You aren't a geek-- you're a graphic artist who knows enough about computers to be dangerous.
End of fucking story.
Re:Some people from Digg snuck through
on
A Geek On Everest
·
· Score: 1, Funny
Flash is an abomination unto God. The eleventh commandment was, "Thou shalt not be a complete ignoramus, for Flash is not a true standard."
Alas, while lost in the desert, the chosen worshiped golden idols, and all things shiny, and did hold presentation more dear than God or standards or content. And so the internet did become a desert also, bereft of intelligence and littered with the bones of broken websites and pages inaccessible to those not of the tribes of Adobe.
In his wrath, God sent down a plague of locusts to eat the flesh of the fallen, and the fallen did tear out their eyes and wail in agony, and the plague's names were Microsoft and Adobe.
At least, that's what my New Geek International Version says.
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." Thomas Jefferson, 1812
Did you even read Dan Fernandez's blog? He makes it clear: It is contrary to the license...
Yes: it's contrary to the Express version of the software. As the developer didn't use the Express version, he is not bound by the Express EULA. He is bound by the EULA he accepted when installing the professional version.
That's the whole point. Microsoft is trying to bind him to a license he hasn't accepted....most users aren't asking for it...
So, then, what's the fuss?...and Microsoft, a commercial software company, has made a business decision to require users to upgrade to the full version for this functionality.
The developer isn't bound by Microsoft's business decisions. He is bound by the agreement he made with Microsoft when he installed the professional version of Visual Studio. Again, as he never agreed to the Express EULA, he is not bound by it, no matter what Microsoft might desire in their business decisions.
Believe it or not, the most effective deterrents to another 9/11 type attack are the war in Iraq, and the upcoming pounding of Iran.
You are kidding, right?
Most of the attackers were from Saudia Arabia. We're not doing a *damned* thing about them. Our work in Afghanistan has replaced one set of warlords with another set of warlords. Our work in Iraq has turned a relatively-stable, more-or-less progressive country into a warzone. Where Iraqi citizens had a lot to lose before, they now have nothing to lose. Instead off reducing the likelihood of terrorist attacks, our unfounded war in Iraq has *increased* the available pool of terrorists.
Pro-terror heads of state in the ME need to understand that bad things happening here in America means very bad things happening to them, personally.
Do you believe Saddam Hussein had *anything* to do with 9/11? All we showed the middle east is that we attack random, mostly-stable countries when we can't catch those actually responsible. (That is, bin Laden, whom Bush swore to bring to justice.)
And in case you didn't notice, we're not winning in Iraq. The US spends 3 times as much on the military as the rest of the world combined, and we can't even beat a few thousand poorly-funded "insurgents." I think the war is proving the US military is ineffective at urban warfare.
The thing that most prevents another 9/11-type attack is 9/11. You are right about one thing: the main reason 9/11 happened was because we in the US were naive. We ignored the fact that most other countries suffer from the occasional terrorist attack. (Some other countries see daily terrorist attacks.) Now, I doubt passengers are going to sit idly by during another plane hijacking.
Problem is, I doubt most folks here would recognize a different attack vector until it was too late. At least I'm giving up my liberties so I can have the illusion of safety.
However, while I was napping last night, someone conveniently changed the definition to mean "when the mass media doesn't give a certain pet story/cause/event of mine the attention I think it deserves."
The problem is, here in America, "mass media" is controlled by very few people. There's almost no independent media left. So, most news stories are controlled by a small number of self-interested individuals. Some are controlled by the profit motive. Others are controlled by their limited access. In the end, we get a very slanted view of "news."
Censorship occurs at the moment of publication. Who censors it is almost irrelevant. It doesn't have to be government. If 90% of the population gets its news from.002% of the population, the.002% may choose to censor what the rest hears.
Really, all it means is, our culture has been trained to give a fuck about American Idol, but not about the important stuff, like, "Why are we busy destroying Iraq?"
I'm not positive that science has everything right. . .
That's the great thing about science: neither do scientists! They don't know what they have right, either. Isn't that a fucking hoot?
What they know is what *makes sense* based on observed facts. The epistemology of science is simple: if your explanation is contradicted by observation, it is not true. Otherwise, it *might* be true.
That's it. Nothing is ever "proven." It's just that some things only have one current explanation, and so we use those as our working assumptions. If another explanation comes around that isn't contradicted by the *observable facts*, that explanation is also considered.
Human nature makes us sure of ourselves-- sometimes *too* sure. But, for the most part, the scientific method, and the knowledge gained from that method, are self-correcting.
And that is why this museum can never win any converts from those who understand science. Their explanations do not cover the observable facts.
"There it is, my creation, perfect and holy in all ways. Now, I can rest."
(pause)
"Oh, my me. I left fucking pot everywhere. I should never have smoked that joint on the third day. Shit! If I leave pot everywhere that's gonna to give people the impression they're supposed to *use* it."
There were other movies with tons of CG not long after, like The Last Starfighter. Most of them had poor scripts as well. TRON didn't set the CG industry back 10 years; it was 10 years ahead of its time.
And, it *was* expensive. Unless you were after the CG look of the time, there was no reason to use CG.
I was running Charon, the email server, on Netware 3.11. For the desktop, I had Pegasus running on MS-Windows 3.0 and 3.1 machines. I had an FTP server and gopher running, too, and a btreive database system.
Those who think Netware is just a file and print server have no clue.
Netware was a fantastic product. It is the reason I learned to expect reliability and easy administration from my servers. (For the time, it really was easy to administer. You set it up, and it ran.)
In other news, research proves that most beer users are plenty satisfied with Budweiser.
No matter how true it is, or how forcefully you say it's what people prefer, Budweiser is still a suck-ass beer. Popularity is not a good indicator of worth.
The fact that a reporter missed this bit of history is typical. No sense of history or heritage.
Ironic statement.
Don't confuse the brand, owned by IBM, with the code, originated with Microsoft, that became Windows server.
The code for OS/2 was truly a joint effort. Both IBM and Microsoft had a hand in the design and implementation of OS/2 1.x. After the divorce, the code ended up in IBM's hands.
The code for NT was developed by Dave Cutler, who wrote VMS before going to Microsoft. The higher-level code was developed independently of Microsoft's OS/2 effort, at most sharing a few developers. (There was once an OS/2 1.x-compatible subsystem of MS-Windows NT. I don't know if it's still there, but like the POSIX subsystem, it was a compatibility subsystem, and not part of the main operating system.)
MS-Windows NT could perhaps be a cousin of OS/2, or even a nephew/niece, but is not a direct descendant. I would even go so far as to say that GNU/Linux has more OS/2 code than MS-Windows.
Unfortunately, due to the apathy of most US citizens, this won't end the career of any politician. Oh, it'll end careers of people who try to participate in society, rather than just being well-behaved consumers of pop-culture.
Life in prison? What the hell? Seizure of property? That's even worse! It's so easy to abuse a law simply to seize property.
Slashdot Mirror
Why no complaints about Calculator or Notepad? Why no complaints about Hyperterminal?
Because you can easily replace them? Because Microsoft hasn't limited the ability to run other programs, such as Putty?
Why isn't Google complaining about Linux's find?
Because the GNU/Linux developers haven't intentionally hobbled Google's ability to write a search system for GNU/Linux?
Apple is far more anti-competitive than MS? Why doesn't anyone hassle them?
Uhm... how do you mean? Is Apple in a dominant position, and capable of using its dominant position to force others out of business?
This knee-jerk windows hating grows so fucking tiresome and is so transparent it is not even funny.
The thing that grows tiresome for me is watching Microsoft use the same old illegal tricks to put competitors at a disadvantage, rather than competing on merit. (The trick to a "free market" is competing on merit, not market dominance.)
How about taking care of something that matters such as the obvious price fixing in the gasoline market?
Fuck, yeah.
Fucking democratic governments and laws - completely useless and corrupt. But oh, you get the illusion that your vote matters... wake up dipshits, you've been taken for a ride.
Fuckin' A yeah!
The "information wants to be free" and "everything is okay when it's done using technology, but only when it's the people and not corporations or government" arguments can be saved for elsewhere.
Why?
Seriously. Why?
These are relevant points of discussion. I do not place the rights of the corporation above the rights of the individual. In fact, I hold that the rights of the corporation are inferior to the rights of the individual. I ask honestly, does the corporation even have the right to restrict the reporting of *any* individual?
I hold they do not. In our twisted society, of course, it is not only allowed, but encouraged. However, that does not make it *right*.
I don't care how much equipment this guy totes up the side of a mountain while being passed by the couple of thousand other tourists heading up to the summit.
If you use Flash for your website, you lose your geek credentials. You aren't a geek-- you're a graphic artist who knows enough about computers to be dangerous.
End of fucking story.
Flash is an abomination unto God. The eleventh commandment was, "Thou shalt not be a complete ignoramus, for Flash is not a true standard."
Alas, while lost in the desert, the chosen worshiped golden idols, and all things shiny, and did hold presentation more dear than God or standards or content. And so the internet did become a desert also, bereft of intelligence and littered with the bones of broken websites and pages inaccessible to those not of the tribes of Adobe.
In his wrath, God sent down a plague of locusts to eat the flesh of the fallen, and the fallen did tear out their eyes and wail in agony, and the plague's names were Microsoft and Adobe.
At least, that's what my New Geek International Version says.
Linux isn't a company, so no hostile takeover can occur.
However, now that Linux has become commercialized, it's possible to take over those companies.
I always thought it was lame of Microsoft to choose Vista, since the VistA medical records software predates MS-Windows by many, many years.
The Apple ][ is responsible for the computer revolution, so I'm glad folks remember and celebrate it.
You don't have to read these threads, you know.
Any Dem consultant that proposes this today needs to be taken out back, pistol whipped, fired, and then pistol whipped again.
Can't we just cut out the middle-man and do this to all politicians?
Please?
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
Thomas Jefferson, 1812
Did you even read Dan Fernandez's blog? He makes it clear: It is contrary to the license...
...most users aren't asking for it...
...and Microsoft, a commercial software company, has made a business decision to require users to upgrade to the full version for this functionality.
Yes: it's contrary to the Express version of the software. As the developer didn't use the Express version, he is not bound by the Express EULA. He is bound by the EULA he accepted when installing the professional version.
That's the whole point. Microsoft is trying to bind him to a license he hasn't accepted.
So, then, what's the fuss?
The developer isn't bound by Microsoft's business decisions. He is bound by the agreement he made with Microsoft when he installed the professional version of Visual Studio. Again, as he never agreed to the Express EULA, he is not bound by it, no matter what Microsoft might desire in their business decisions.
Believe it or not, the most effective deterrents to another 9/11 type attack are the war in Iraq, and the upcoming pounding of Iran.
You are kidding, right?
Most of the attackers were from Saudia Arabia. We're not doing a *damned* thing about them. Our work in Afghanistan has replaced one set of warlords with another set of warlords. Our work in Iraq has turned a relatively-stable, more-or-less progressive country into a warzone. Where Iraqi citizens had a lot to lose before, they now have nothing to lose. Instead off reducing the likelihood of terrorist attacks, our unfounded war in Iraq has *increased* the available pool of terrorists.
Pro-terror heads of state in the ME need to understand that bad things happening here in America means very bad things happening to them, personally.
Do you believe Saddam Hussein had *anything* to do with 9/11? All we showed the middle east is that we attack random, mostly-stable countries when we can't catch those actually responsible. (That is, bin Laden, whom Bush swore to bring to justice.)
And in case you didn't notice, we're not winning in Iraq. The US spends 3 times as much on the military as the rest of the world combined, and we can't even beat a few thousand poorly-funded "insurgents." I think the war is proving the US military is ineffective at urban warfare.
The thing that most prevents another 9/11-type attack is 9/11. You are right about one thing: the main reason 9/11 happened was because we in the US were naive. We ignored the fact that most other countries suffer from the occasional terrorist attack. (Some other countries see daily terrorist attacks.) Now, I doubt passengers are going to sit idly by during another plane hijacking.
Problem is, I doubt most folks here would recognize a different attack vector until it was too late. At least I'm giving up my liberties so I can have the illusion of safety.
However, while I was napping last night, someone conveniently changed the definition to mean "when the mass media doesn't give a certain pet story/cause/event of mine the attention I think it deserves."
.002% of the population, the .002% may choose to censor what the rest hears.
The problem is, here in America, "mass media" is controlled by very few people. There's almost no independent media left. So, most news stories are controlled by a small number of self-interested individuals. Some are controlled by the profit motive. Others are controlled by their limited access. In the end, we get a very slanted view of "news."
Censorship occurs at the moment of publication. Who censors it is almost irrelevant. It doesn't have to be government. If 90% of the population gets its news from
Really, all it means is, our culture has been trained to give a fuck about American Idol, but not about the important stuff, like, "Why are we busy destroying Iraq?"
I'm not positive that science has everything right. . .
That's the great thing about science: neither do scientists! They don't know what they have right, either. Isn't that a fucking hoot?
What they know is what *makes sense* based on observed facts. The epistemology of science is simple: if your explanation is contradicted by observation, it is not true. Otherwise, it *might* be true.
That's it. Nothing is ever "proven." It's just that some things only have one current explanation, and so we use those as our working assumptions. If another explanation comes around that isn't contradicted by the *observable facts*, that explanation is also considered.
Human nature makes us sure of ourselves-- sometimes *too* sure. But, for the most part, the scientific method, and the knowledge gained from that method, are self-correcting.
And that is why this museum can never win any converts from those who understand science. Their explanations do not cover the observable facts.
I always wondered why God had to rest...
Ob Bill Hicks:
"There it is, my creation, perfect and holy in all ways. Now, I can rest."
(pause)
"Oh, my me. I left fucking pot everywhere. I should never have smoked that joint on the third day. Shit! If I leave pot everywhere that's gonna to give people the impression they're supposed to *use* it."
(pause)
"Now I have to create Republicans."
Notice how only *one* other car stops? Nobody gets out to help, nothing.
We live a great fuckin' world.
Has anyone pinned down the exact moment when the government apparatus for the US became entirely the domain of corporations and their shills?
Sure. May 10th, 1886, SANTA CLARA COUNTY v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. That's when corporations were granted "personhood," with the same rights and protections as individuals.
At that point, corporations stopped being entities that existed only by charter of the people. For good, and especially for ill.
There were other movies with tons of CG not long after, like The Last Starfighter. Most of them had poor scripts as well. TRON didn't set the CG industry back 10 years; it was 10 years ahead of its time.
And, it *was* expensive. Unless you were after the CG look of the time, there was no reason to use CG.
I was running Charon, the email server, on Netware 3.11. For the desktop, I had Pegasus running on MS-Windows 3.0 and 3.1 machines. I had an FTP server and gopher running, too, and a btreive database system.
Those who think Netware is just a file and print server have no clue.
Netware was a fantastic product. It is the reason I learned to expect reliability and easy administration from my servers. (For the time, it really was easy to administer. You set it up, and it ran.)
In other news, research proves that most beer users are plenty satisfied with Budweiser.
No matter how true it is, or how forcefully you say it's what people prefer, Budweiser is still a suck-ass beer. Popularity is not a good indicator of worth.
If this law passes, it's only a question of how many are going to get burned, not whether it's going to happen.
How many are going to get burned?
All of us.
The fact that a reporter missed this bit of history is typical. No sense of history or heritage.
Ironic statement.
Don't confuse the brand, owned by IBM, with the code, originated with Microsoft, that became Windows server.
The code for OS/2 was truly a joint effort. Both IBM and Microsoft had a hand in the design and implementation of OS/2 1.x. After the divorce, the code ended up in IBM's hands.
The code for NT was developed by Dave Cutler, who wrote VMS before going to Microsoft. The higher-level code was developed independently of Microsoft's OS/2 effort, at most sharing a few developers. (There was once an OS/2 1.x-compatible subsystem of MS-Windows NT. I don't know if it's still there, but like the POSIX subsystem, it was a compatibility subsystem, and not part of the main operating system.)
MS-Windows NT could perhaps be a cousin of OS/2, or even a nephew/niece, but is not a direct descendant. I would even go so far as to say that GNU/Linux has more OS/2 code than MS-Windows.
I spend most of my spare time at home watching porn. Does that mean work should be more like porn?
I don't think I've ever heard of this before.
Does that mean that Microsoft innovated?
No.
It means you haven't been paying attention. For the last four years.
Good points, but how to put the kibosh on Vista?
Have it date my ex-girlfriend Stacey. If she doesn't destroy its confidence and turn it into an alcoholic, nothing will.
Unfortunately, due to the apathy of most US citizens, this won't end the career of any politician. Oh, it'll end careers of people who try to participate in society, rather than just being well-behaved consumers of pop-culture.
Life in prison? What the hell? Seizure of property? That's even worse! It's so easy to abuse a law simply to seize property.