So stop asking the UN to do something in Darfur. Bush promised to the entire world that he was going to end tyranny and deliver democracy to people, get on with it.
Stop trying to enforce UN resolutions. UN is shit. It doesn't matter what the resolutions are, what they say, who they are targetting.
Stop going to the UN everytime anybody does something you don't like. North Korea tested a bomb? Don't go to the UN and get a resolution to increase sanctions. Those people are already starving, starving more of them won't help at all. Just go and invade like you did in Iraq.
Be man, stop acting like a whiny child and complaining to mommy every time iran or north korea does something you don't like.
Don't discard his comment so easily. Without a centralized blacklist every mail admin is going to create their own blacklist or their own rules for blocking mail. What's worse mail admins are going to find a way to distribute their blacklists amongst each other.
Instead of going to one or a handful of places to try and get your mail though you are going to have to deal with each of your recepients one at a time. Good luck with that.
Why would the UN do anything? They could not stop the US from invading iraq. They could not stop israel from setting lebanon back fifty years and displacing a million people.
Didn't the president say he was going to free the people of the world from tyranical leaders and deliver democracy to the world?
Maybe the rest of the world is just waiting for bush to follow through on his word. Why bother doing something when bush promised to do it. He promised in front of the entire world and he is a man of god. He would not lie. He says god speaks through him (yes that's an actual quote).
I love it when the people think the UN is the shits when it comes to darfur but a yoke when it comes to iraq.
Yes, it has full access to your machine including the ability to read and write to hard drives, reboot your machine, muck with your registry etc.
"t's much more advanced than AJAX, and it was there 5-8 years ago. "
Yes. It was Microsoft's answer to the applet. Applets were first of course. Too bad Sun never could make them work because they were much safer then activex.
"Java never cut it (buggy, bloated, and hard to relatively hard to develop)."
Bloated maybe, buggy no, hard to develop? Nonsense. Much easier to develop java applets then activex components.
"AJAX is just another Javascript kludge. "
Yes.
"Active X is pretty damn useful when done correctly. I have a bunch of Active X apps that I use via IE."
"Certain things are worth dying for, certain things are worth fighting for that is the point of the quote."
Yes certain things. Iraq is not one of those things.
"However we need to fix what we broke."
Define Fix. And then tell me is anybody is actually fixing things.
Now I am all for fixking things as soon as the people who broke it admit that's it's broken and get punished for breaking it. According to the president of the United States iraq is not broken. It does not need to fixed. Who are you to say it's broken when the president, the vice president, the congress and the joint chiefs of staff say that it's not broken?
"Someone who believes that nothing is worth more than they are is pathetic."
How is that working out for you? You know the whole "pretend I said something and argue against it" thing? Did you enjoy beating that straw man?
"I don't support the iraq war, but people have the right to think differently,"
Sure but I also have the right to call them idiots.
"maybe you need to stop assuming everyone is out for their own self some people are selfless be thet far and few bettween. "
Selfless is helping the poor, selfless is volunteering at the soup kitchen, selfless is giving blood, selfless is buying a bum breakfast. Selfless is not invading a country which never attacked you and killing thousands of them for fun and profit.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. "
Well that's good to know. Now I can justify any act whatsoever by saying it's not the worst thing I can do. Sure rape is an ugly thing but it's not the ugliest thing, I could have killed her and then raped her but I raped her and left her alive. See I am being selfless and ethical!.
"The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. "
It's impossible to be moral and patriotic at the same time. They are contradictory.
"They may believe in a stable Iraq. We fucked it up, we need to fix it."
Who is "we" kimo sabe? I don't see you there. If you love it so much go there and do the killing yourself that's what I say. It's cowardly and immoral to send others to do the killing for you. You don't have to enlist either, you can go as a civillian
"IT'S NOT ABOUT CONTRIES. IT'S ABOUT CERTAIN BASIC RIGHTS THAT ALL HUMANS SHOULD BE AFFORDED."
If it really was about basic rights for all humans I would be for the war. But it's not. You notice that we have let all kinds of nasty dictators all around the world continue to brutalize their people. Since you an idiot you have failed to notice that we are actually supporting some of those dictators.
"War is wrong and evil...but to argue that war is always avoidable is to ignore all of history."
Nice straw man there, did you have fun beating it up? Did I say that war is always avoidable? Did I even say that any war was avoidable?
Do you really think that it makes you look smart when you make up an argument and then argue against it (thereby thinking you are winning an argument against yourself)?
"So get over the fact that we are at war and start excepting the fact that we as a people have an obligation to make sure those people have something left."
Yes sure as soon as we punish those who caused the damage in the first place. You know personal responsibility and all that shit.
"Oh and most of those in the military that I know are damn proud to be fighting for this country."
Yadda yadda yadda. Who the fuck cares what some nitwit who could not get a job in the real world is broud to fight for. Anybody who thinks killing iraqis is "fighting for this country" is a douchebag without the brains to fight themselves out of a paper bag. The only people who think like that are chickenhawks. Go talk to the enlisted men and tell me is they think they are fighting for their country.
Fighting for this country my ass. Was my country under attack from iraq?
Everything is clintons fault. Every time clinton takes a breath a hundred mosquitos are created somewhere in the world. Clinton is responsible for the darkness and cold. The boxing day tsunami was caused by clinton when he farted. The other day I tripped and fell, that was clinton's fault but it was hillary clinton's fault not bill, when she has her period she causes people to trip. When chelsea has her period she causes people to break out in pimples.
"Believe it or not, there are many thousands of people who think stability in Iraq is worth dying for, even knowing what we know today."
I don't believe that. Maybe some people are stupid enough to want to die for a stable iraq and maybe others are hopped up on gods and guns but I just can't see why any sane and rational person would die for a stable iraq.
First of all Iraq was already stable. Secondly why iraq? Why not a stable china, stable north korea, stable, somalia, stable equador. I mean why decide that you are willing to die for a stable iraq? How come the iraqis deserve stability more then any other human beings on the planet?
"So if your opinion of the war depends on believing that for no good reason Bush is heartlessly sending people to die against their will,"
Nobody says he did it for no reason. Bush has lots of reasons. Oil, venegence for his dad, personal wealth, prving he is a man, hastening the return of jesus, securing the jewish vote, rewarding his supporters, the list goes on and on. Bush had many reasons to invade iraq.
I frequently wonder the same thing and I have come to the following conclusion.
Hunter S Thompson once described a politician running for the president to a moose during mating season. Normally moose are wily creatures. If you go hunting for them they are hard to spot, they are supremely aware of their environment, they can hear and smell you coming from miles away. Once a moose is in mating season though all that flies out the window. The second they hear or smell anything that even resembles a female moose they will charge towards her like... well a crazed moose!. They will crash throught the bush making all kinds of noise, they will leave chunks of their flesh on trees that they broke on the way. They just don't care, just want that female!.
Just as a politician becomes like a crazed moose when running for the presidency a CEO becomes like a crazed mooose when somebody waves money in their face. Once they see that money mind blanks of all other thoughts. Their memory, ethics, morals, bodily functions, wife, children, the planet, shareholders, employees, everything else gets driven out and is replaced with the smell of that money.
When MS waves money in front of a CEO the CEO stops thinking. He completely disregards the dozens of times MS has backstabbed it's partners and thinks to himself "it won't happen to me, those other CEOs were stupid, I am smart and handsome and I deserve this".
I don't want to sound negative, it's only human (and mooose) nature. We would all probably act the same way if somebody waved enough money in our faces. Soon all thoughts of right, wrong, morality, history, and diligence would be replaced by the mansion in the hamptons or that DB9 we have been salivating about.
They arrainged for third parties to do the funding while assuring the third parties they would be re-imbursed. Then in truly MS fashion they stabbed their friends in the back.
That's on top of directly funding SCO in the first place by buying a license from them.
Good to see that the shills are not giving up though.
In that case he should have included the price of MSDN subscription on his comparison. Not only that but he needs to see if they are comparable support. For example does the MSDN subscription give you the option of calling MS when you have a question about how DLINQ works?, will you be able to call MS, report a bug and have them fix it for you? will you be able to call them and get an explanation of what an error message means?
I have been an MSDN subscriber for most of my adult life and as far as I know the only support I get is help files, software, and a web site access. It still costs extra money to call MS and it usually takes three days to get to somebody who is competent enough to answer your question.
"Is a tool that is very, very good for developing GUI apps. That's almost certainly the point of wanting to license QT. They are probably developing an app that they don't want to (or can't) release the source for that is GUI based."
Ok. You want to build an app for windows only that is got a rich gui. You look around on the market and the only things you see are QT and Visual studio. You see no other options because you are basically a blind idiot PHB.
You then look at the price of QT and look at the price of VS. YOu don't notice that QT comes with support and your requirements say you must buy support. However because you are complete idiot you fail to notice that the VS you buy for 700 does not come with support.
Having done your exhaustive study of the marketplace looking at all (two!) of the options in the market, having (not) compared the support levels you get with all those products you choose the one that you and feeble mind think is the best EVAR!.
Sounds like a typical PHB. Has no idea of what's out there, can't read the fine print, can't compare apples with apples, doesn't understand what you get when you buy something, and in the end buys a product based on a magazine ad.
"The OSS community could learn a lesson from MSDN which is where he will get support on the MS development platform."
So he is counting on getting support from the web site and community boards, big deal.
MSDN sucks. It's virtually impossible to find relevant information. The search sucks. It's quicker to find information on google then on MSDN. The OSS world needs to learn the lesson from MSDN and not do anything to duplicate it.
So is it your point that no human being can ever buy support for any other open source toolkit other then QT?
He says that QT costs too much so we goes to VS for around 700 dollars. Does that 700 dollars include support? No it does not. He just threw that out because he is a troll. He is comparing the cost of QT + support to VS without support and picking a solution that only works on windows. C# + GTK is available for free from mono which he also completely ignores.
The guy decides to drop QT because it costs more and moves to C# without once considering java with swing or swt or anything else? He never considers Mono and goes directly to paying for VS while not buying support from MS.
The guy is either an idiot, shill, astro turfer or a troll.
I disagree. I do think it has a point. I can certainly see a fundamentalist xtian not wanting to take risks with the top level intelligence agents and exposing them to islam. Like it or not Islam seems to inspire passion in people, enough to make them kill themselves. I don't know how or why but it seems to be a pretty powerful idealogy. People who are driven by religious conviction look at the world differently then non religious people. If I was to put myself in Bush Sr. mind I might certainly have second doubts about sending elite intelligence agents into a religious organization and risk getting them hooked on islam.
How is that an ad hominem? Bush is a xtian (a devout one). He actually said atheists are not real americans. How is it ad hominem to actualy point that out?
The price for redhat includes support the price for XP does not. Not only that but it also comes with databasess (plural), directory services, compilers, office suite, and thousands of other pieces of software.
The author is cherry picking and presenting half truths in order to try to make a point. It's a weasily thing really.
Anyway so QT costs a lot of money, why not use wxwindows, FOX, FLTK, or a dozen other perfectly fine open source toolkits.
So "one company" charges you a lot of money for real time linux why not go to a competitor?
I think this guys is thinking OSS is like windows and that there is only one vendor for anything. Most windows shops are shocked to find that they can shop around for vendors and negotiate contracts. They don't have to bend over for their vendors (strange concept huh?).
What do you mean George Soros? How many media outlets does he own? Most media outlets are owned by republicans and right wing corporations like disney, GE, Murdoch etc.
I am not aware of one major news outlet Soros owns. Care to enlighten me?
Slashdot Mirror
If you didn't post anonymously then I might take up the arguement. There is no sense in trying to hold a conversation with a coward.
Why defend israel anonymously?
Are you really that ashamed of your position?
OK the UN is a pile of shit.
So stop asking the UN to do something in Darfur. Bush promised to the entire world that he was going to end tyranny and deliver democracy to people, get on with it.
Stop trying to enforce UN resolutions. UN is shit. It doesn't matter what the resolutions are, what they say, who they are targetting.
Stop going to the UN everytime anybody does something you don't like. North Korea tested a bomb? Don't go to the UN and get a resolution to increase sanctions. Those people are already starving, starving more of them won't help at all. Just go and invade like you did in Iraq.
Be man, stop acting like a whiny child and complaining to mommy every time iran or north korea does something you don't like.
Don't discard his comment so easily. Without a centralized blacklist every mail admin is going to create their own blacklist or their own rules for blocking mail. What's worse mail admins are going to find a way to distribute their blacklists amongst each other.
Instead of going to one or a handful of places to try and get your mail though you are going to have to deal with each of your recepients one at a time. Good luck with that.
Why would the UN do anything? They could not stop the US from invading iraq. They could not stop israel from setting lebanon back fifty years and displacing a million people.
Didn't the president say he was going to free the people of the world from tyranical leaders and deliver democracy to the world?
Maybe the rest of the world is just waiting for bush to follow through on his word. Why bother doing something when bush promised to do it. He promised in front of the entire world and he is a man of god. He would not lie. He says god speaks through him (yes that's an actual quote).
I love it when the people think the UN is the shits when it comes to darfur but a yoke when it comes to iraq.
"Active X is INCREDIBLY useful for applications"
Yes, it has full access to your machine including the ability to read and write to hard drives, reboot your machine, muck with your registry etc.
"t's much more advanced than AJAX, and it was there 5-8 years ago. "
Yes. It was Microsoft's answer to the applet. Applets were first of course. Too bad Sun never could make them work because they were much safer then activex.
"Java never cut it (buggy, bloated, and hard to relatively hard to develop)."
Bloated maybe, buggy no, hard to develop? Nonsense. Much easier to develop java applets then activex components.
"AJAX is just another Javascript kludge. "
Yes.
"Active X is pretty damn useful when done correctly. I have a bunch of Active X apps that I use via IE."
Great if you are willing to use IE and windows.
"Certain things are worth dying for, certain things are worth fighting for that is the point of the quote."
Yes certain things. Iraq is not one of those things.
"However we need to fix what we broke."
Define Fix. And then tell me is anybody is actually fixing things.
Now I am all for fixking things as soon as the people who broke it admit that's it's broken and get punished for breaking it. According to the president of the United States iraq is not broken. It does not need to fixed. Who are you to say it's broken when the president, the vice president, the congress and the joint chiefs of staff say that it's not broken?
"Someone who believes that nothing is worth more than they are is pathetic."
How is that working out for you? You know the whole "pretend I said something and argue against it" thing? Did you enjoy beating that straw man?
"I don't support the iraq war, but people have the right to think differently,"
Sure but I also have the right to call them idiots.
"maybe you need to stop assuming everyone is out for their own self some people are selfless be thet far and few bettween. "
Selfless is helping the poor, selfless is volunteering at the soup kitchen, selfless is giving blood, selfless is buying a bum breakfast. Selfless is not invading a country which never attacked you and killing thousands of them for fun and profit.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. "
Well that's good to know. Now I can justify any act whatsoever by saying it's not the worst thing I can do. Sure rape is an ugly thing but it's not the ugliest thing, I could have killed her and then raped her but I raped her and left her alive. See I am being selfless and ethical!.
"The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. "
It's impossible to be moral and patriotic at the same time. They are contradictory.
"They may believe in a stable Iraq. We fucked it up, we need to fix it."
Who is "we" kimo sabe? I don't see you there. If you love it so much go there and do the killing yourself that's what I say. It's cowardly and immoral to send others to do the killing for you. You don't have to enlist either, you can go as a civillian
"I'd die for a stable Iraq."
In that case you are an idiot.
"IT'S NOT ABOUT CONTRIES. IT'S ABOUT CERTAIN BASIC RIGHTS THAT ALL HUMANS SHOULD BE AFFORDED."
If it really was about basic rights for all humans I would be for the war. But it's not. You notice that we have let all kinds of nasty dictators all around the world continue to brutalize their people. Since you an idiot you have failed to notice that we are actually supporting some of those dictators.
"War is wrong and evil...but to argue that war is always avoidable is to ignore all of history."
Nice straw man there, did you have fun beating it up? Did I say that war is always avoidable? Did I even say that any war was avoidable?
Do you really think that it makes you look smart when you make up an argument and then argue against it (thereby thinking you are winning an argument against yourself)?
"So get over the fact that we are at war and start excepting the fact that we as a people have an obligation to make sure those people have something left."
Yes sure as soon as we punish those who caused the damage in the first place. You know personal responsibility and all that shit.
"Oh and most of those in the military that I know are damn proud to be fighting for this country."
Yadda yadda yadda. Who the fuck cares what some nitwit who could not get a job in the real world is broud to fight for. Anybody who thinks killing iraqis is "fighting for this country" is a douchebag without the brains to fight themselves out of a paper bag. The only people who think like that are chickenhawks. Go talk to the enlisted men and tell me is they think they are fighting for their country.
Fighting for this country my ass. Was my country under attack from iraq?
How else are we going to counter the massive threat from space al quada is developing?
Everything is clintons fault. Every time clinton takes a breath a hundred mosquitos are created somewhere in the world. Clinton is responsible for the darkness and cold. The boxing day tsunami was caused by clinton when he farted. The other day I tripped and fell, that was clinton's fault but it was hillary clinton's fault not bill, when she has her period she causes people to trip. When chelsea has her period she causes people to break out in pimples.
The whole foley thing was clintons fault too.
"Believe it or not, there are many thousands of people who think stability in Iraq is worth dying for, even knowing what we know today."
I don't believe that. Maybe some people are stupid enough to want to die for a stable iraq and maybe others are hopped up on gods and guns but I just can't see why any sane and rational person would die for a stable iraq.
First of all Iraq was already stable. Secondly why iraq? Why not a stable china, stable north korea, stable, somalia, stable equador. I mean why decide that you are willing to die for a stable iraq? How come the iraqis deserve stability more then any other human beings on the planet?
"So if your opinion of the war depends on believing that for no good reason Bush is heartlessly sending people to die against their will,"
Nobody says he did it for no reason. Bush has lots of reasons. Oil, venegence for his dad, personal wealth, prving he is a man, hastening the return of jesus, securing the jewish vote, rewarding his supporters, the list goes on and on. Bush had many reasons to invade iraq.
A db9. Makes a grown man cry.
I frequently wonder the same thing and I have come to the following conclusion.
Hunter S Thompson once described a politician running for the president to a moose during mating season. Normally moose are wily creatures. If you go hunting for them they are hard to spot, they are supremely aware of their environment, they can hear and smell you coming from miles away. Once a moose is in mating season though all that flies out the window. The second they hear or smell anything that even resembles a female moose they will charge towards her like... well a crazed moose!. They will crash throught the bush making all kinds of noise, they will leave chunks of their flesh on trees that they broke on the way. They just don't care, just want that female!.
Just as a politician becomes like a crazed moose when running for the presidency a CEO becomes like a crazed mooose when somebody waves money in their face. Once they see that money mind blanks of all other thoughts. Their memory, ethics, morals, bodily functions, wife, children, the planet, shareholders, employees, everything else gets driven out and is replaced with the smell of that money.
When MS waves money in front of a CEO the CEO stops thinking. He completely disregards the dozens of times MS has backstabbed it's partners and thinks to himself "it won't happen to me, those other CEOs were stupid, I am smart and handsome and I deserve this".
I don't want to sound negative, it's only human (and mooose) nature. We would all probably act the same way if somebody waved enough money in our faces. Soon all thoughts of right, wrong, morality, history, and diligence would be replaced by the mansion in the hamptons or that DB9 we have been salivating about.
They arrainged for third parties to do the funding while assuring the third parties they would be re-imbursed. Then in truly MS fashion they stabbed their friends in the back.
That's on top of directly funding SCO in the first place by buying a license from them.
Good to see that the shills are not giving up though.
You mean a sworn affidavit in a court of law, at the risk of perjury, in front of a judge and council is not good enough for you.
In that case he should have included the price of MSDN subscription on his comparison. Not only that but he needs to see if they are comparable support. For example does the MSDN subscription give you the option of calling MS when you have a question about how DLINQ works?, will you be able to call MS, report a bug and have them fix it for you? will you be able to call them and get an explanation of what an error message means?
I have been an MSDN subscriber for most of my adult life and as far as I know the only support I get is help files, software, and a web site access. It still costs extra money to call MS and it usually takes three days to get to somebody who is competent enough to answer your question.
"Is a tool that is very, very good for developing GUI apps. That's almost certainly the point of wanting to license QT. They are probably developing an app that they don't want to (or can't) release the source for that is GUI based."
Ok. You want to build an app for windows only that is got a rich gui. You look around on the market and the only things you see are QT and Visual studio. You see no other options because you are basically a blind idiot PHB.
You then look at the price of QT and look at the price of VS. YOu don't notice that QT comes with support and your requirements say you must buy support. However because you are complete idiot you fail to notice that the VS you buy for 700 does not come with support.
Having done your exhaustive study of the marketplace looking at all (two!) of the options in the market, having (not) compared the support levels you get with all those products you choose the one that you and feeble mind think is the best EVAR!.
Sounds like a typical PHB. Has no idea of what's out there, can't read the fine print, can't compare apples with apples, doesn't understand what you get when you buy something, and in the end buys a product based on a magazine ad.
"The OSS community could learn a lesson from MSDN which is where he will get support on the MS development platform."
So he is counting on getting support from the web site and community boards, big deal.
MSDN sucks. It's virtually impossible to find relevant information. The search sucks. It's quicker to find information on google then on MSDN. The OSS world needs to learn the lesson from MSDN and not do anything to duplicate it.
So is it your point that no human being can ever buy support for any other open source toolkit other then QT?
He says that QT costs too much so we goes to VS for around 700 dollars. Does that 700 dollars include support? No it does not. He just threw that out because he is a troll. He is comparing the cost of QT + support to VS without support and picking a solution that only works on windows. C# + GTK is available for free from mono which he also completely ignores.
The guy decides to drop QT because it costs more and moves to C# without once considering java with swing or swt or anything else? He never considers Mono and goes directly to paying for VS while not buying support from MS.
The guy is either an idiot, shill, astro turfer or a troll.
I disagree. I do think it has a point. I can certainly see a fundamentalist xtian not wanting to take risks with the top level intelligence agents and exposing them to islam. Like it or not Islam seems to inspire passion in people, enough to make them kill themselves. I don't know how or why but it seems to be a pretty powerful idealogy. People who are driven by religious conviction look at the world differently then non religious people. If I was to put myself in Bush Sr. mind I might certainly have second doubts about sending elite intelligence agents into a religious organization and risk getting them hooked on islam.
Words and phrases to google for.
Gnucash, SQL Ledger, Turbocash, compiere, lazy 8 ledger, centraview, opentaps, xrms, monex.
How is that an ad hominem? Bush is a xtian (a devout one). He actually said atheists are not real americans. How is it ad hominem to actualy point that out?
The price for redhat includes support the price for XP does not. Not only that but it also comes with databasess (plural), directory services, compilers, office suite, and thousands of other pieces of software.
The author is cherry picking and presenting half truths in order to try to make a point. It's a weasily thing really.
Anyway so QT costs a lot of money, why not use wxwindows, FOX, FLTK, or a dozen other perfectly fine open source toolkits.
So "one company" charges you a lot of money for real time linux why not go to a competitor?
I think this guys is thinking OSS is like windows and that there is only one vendor for anything. Most windows shops are shocked to find that they can shop around for vendors and negotiate contracts. They don't have to bend over for their vendors (strange concept huh?).
What do you mean George Soros? How many media outlets does he own? Most media outlets are owned by republicans and right wing corporations like disney, GE, Murdoch etc.
I am not aware of one major news outlet Soros owns. Care to enlighten me?