Well it's no use talking to you. It's now pretty apparent that you are an astro turfer or a shill. Let's hope you are an astro turfer so at least you are getting paid to believe a proven liar.
Buy hey don't let that stop you from calling other people islamic fundamentalist just because they don't believe a MS executive.
"but until the future actually happens you are unable to know for sure. However earlier, by your own admission, you said that nothing could change your mind."
I never said such a thing. You are now making up things you think I said which is the sign of a true zealot.
As I said though. It is more reasonable to think the he is lying again then to think that he is telling the truth this time. It is you who are acting like islamic fundamentalist fanatic.
Fanatics tend to believe things that they have no evidence for and they tend to ignore any evidence presented to them which contradicts their beliefs.
I am afraid in this case there is no comparison. You are the fanatic zealot for completely ignoring all the past statements of MS and Mr Mundie and now accepting without any evidence whatsoever that Mr Mundie and MS have done a complete 180 degree turnaround.
Yes you compared me to a islamic fundamentalist because I think mundie is lying again and because I have pointed out that he has lied at least a dozen times in the press already.
It seems to me that perhaps you are more like a islamic fundamentalist then I am. After all accepting the word of a known and habitual liar without any hesitation whatsoever is an act of zealotry. It's very similar to believe who still follow preachers who predict the end of the earth even when the day passes without incident.
Of the two of us I would say you are the true zealot. I base my beliefs of what somebody has done in the past. If somebody lies to me a dozen times then it's reasonable for me to believe that they are lying again. It's unreasonable for you to accept that they are telling the truth now.
I am afraid in this case you are islamic terrorist and not me.
YES!. I am exactly like a terrorist!. There is absolutely no difference at all between my looking at mundies track record on the truth and deciding that he is probably lying again and blowing up a building killing three thousand people!. Those two acts are indisguishable from each other. There is no difference whatsoever!. I am exactly like a islamic fundamentalist.
"he problem with your argument is that no matter what MS does you will not be convinced that they are playing nice with the GPL, and thus it is not falsifiable, and hence not rational."
Right. I won't and I am guessing most people won't either. Since we all lack the ability to read his mind we have to guess at which if the possibilites are more likely. Perhaps you have some special skill which allows you to read his mind and know for sure that he has changed his mind and is now sincerely interested in playing nice with the GPL. Please let us know how your super human powers of mind reading have convinced you that he is not lying this time.
I am afraid the rest of us who do not share your amazing powers of mind reading will have to simply make do with taking a look at his past track records and making judgements on based on that.
"Also, I fail to see what a vote has to do with the truth; if popular opinion did reflect the truth science would be much simpler. Special relativity? Let's take a vote."
YOu missed my point entirely. The vote was not on what is the truth, it's was what is more likely.
Is it more likely that...
1) Mundie is lieing? 2) MS has changed their tune and wants to play nice with GPL?
So what happened? Did God speak to him last night and pointed out the error of his ways? Exactly how does one change such fundamentally held beliefs in such a short time anyway?
I think occams razor applies here. He has lied dozens of times in the press already. What's more likely? he is lieing now or he has truly changed his mind and now wants to make sure all MS products can work with GPLed software.
Looks it's a computer journal. The job of a computer journal is not to ask hard hitting questions. It's to suck up to your advertisers and to make sure you get their press releases published as articles and to generally act as their publicity agents.
If Ms wants to play nice all they have to do is the publish some specs. NTFS, SMB, Active Directory, Office file formats etc. I mean full disclosure. They could also remove the DRM from their file formats which prevents open office from even attempting to open their files.
Ask yourself this question. Is a company which makes sure that the sample files it ships with office can only be opened up with MS office serious about playing nice? I don't think so. NOTE TO SHILLS: The previous statement has nothing to with the capability, the files are locked and refuse to be opened by open office.
Anyway this is Mundie we are talking about. If he doesn't lie a dozen times by lunch he feels quesy.
The larger the corporation you work for the less people matter. I have worked for some large corporation and I have no idea how they kept going. Their products were crap, nobody gave a damn, the workers were treated like shit, the customers worse. Despite all that they kept winning large contracdts and their profits were going up. Their products and services are measurably inferior to the competitions and they cost more but the customers kept choosing them because they were a big company.
A large company build it's own momentum. People buy the products and services because they think a large company will be more reliable or something. It's crazy.
Anyway a programmer no matter how brilliant just does not matter to a large corporation. If anything they are a liability because they will be disruptive to the crappy programmers and will not enjoy using the chosen bondage language (java, c# or VB.NET).
"Like I said. I didn't think you would agree and that's ok. The system didn't side in your favor so you cry foul."
No the system didn't side with humanity. Instead corrupt officials subverted the justice system after taking bribes.
"Apple has been very successful using 3rd party slave labor to make a killing on their iPods."
Slaves? Do you have a link to that? I would be very interested in american companies using slave labor. I know for sure many american companies use prison labor in the US and elsewhere but I have never heard of using actual slaves.
"So even by your measure they are very unethical. I agree with you there."
Give me a link to apple using using slaves and I will agree. I wonder if MS uses third party slaves for packaging, marketing, pressing CDs, etc.
Most MS divisions don't make money. Most MS products are free. MS makes profit on windows and office and uses that to subsidize all their other products.
"No exception needs to be made for Bill because I don't agree that your assertion fits. It's not like he robbed a bank and shot people in the process. He was just very successfully competitive in a very competitive industry."
He ripped off millions of people by abusing his monopoly.
"If you are of the mind (as I think you are) that MS has done a great wrong and was rightly convicted the fact that all parties came to settlement means the social harm has been atoned for. Either way it is behind us."
I disagree. By bribing govt officials MS arrainged for itself a light slap on the wrist. To me this is nothing short of subversion of democracy.
"If you really think he is evil and just set up his charity work to get on the good side of public opinion why does he continue?"
Either because there are still many people who think that he has not rehabilitated himself or he himself feels guilty. Either way neigher him or MS have changed their ways. MS continues to be one of the most unethical and sleazy corporations in the world.
"If he wanted to he could sit back and be a prick with his money like Steve Jobs"
YEs steve jobs is a prick. I mean look at all the fucked up things he does. Now what does he do with him money that got you all pissed off at him again?
"On the other hand, Steve hasn't been successful enough to do nearly as much social good so it doesn't really matter."
It's been my experience that in the corporate world less morals or ethics you have the more successful you become. That's why the kind old man who runs the shoe repair shop in my neighborhood is till scratching a living and Bill G is the richest man in the world.
"Clearly, though, you feel that he doesn't give enough. What, then, would be enough? How many billions of dollars must Bill Gates give away in order to get your approval?"
I think he should give away all of it. Every cent. It all comes from ripping off people. It's all bad money.
"My guess is that you (and most people here) will always demonize Gates regardless of any enormous positive impact he ends up making on the world. That isn't moral superiority; that's enmity."
Osama funded orphanages, drug lords in south america fund all kinds of charitites. Giving away your ill gotten gains is a common tactic to win public approval. It doesn't impress me. If Bill really wants to impress me he could split up his company, he could publish the specs for NTFS, NTFS, DOC etc, he could provide a "save as ODF" feature to office. He could do a thousand things that demonstrate that he is no longer willing to rip off the billions of people who are paying monopoly level prices for his products.
He doesn't do any of that because he still wants those billions pouring into his pocket. Sure he gives away some it but that's easy when you make ten billion a year.
You said it doesn't matter. Why do you make an exception for Bill? Is is because what he did was merely white collar crime? Is it because "all" he did was rip off billions of people a little at a time?
If I had a hundred billion dollars I would be happy to turn over a years salary. Hell I would be happy to turn over 100 years of salary. Hell I would be happy to turn over 99 billion dollars to you.
I would still have a billion dollars and I think I would get by on that.
Every day hundreds of millions of Americans wake up and go to work. They earn good honest money doing good honest work and they pay their taxes. Out of those taxes hundreds of billions go to provide food stamps, health care, heating oil, transportation, clean water, vaccinations, and a slew of other services for the poor and indigent of the world. Hundreds of billions. Furthermore the combined charitable output of those hundreds of millions of americans dwarfs Bills.
That's the cathedral and the bazaar for you. I am more impressed with my neighbor who gets up every day and sits in a parking lot all day come rain or shine then I am with Bill G. If Bill G decided not to charge monopoly prices for his goods then those hundreds of billions of people would have a few extra cents in their pockets.
What makes you think I decide how much you give? How much you give is up to you. I must say though that for last couple of thousand years religions such as christianity, islam and budhism have suggested certain percentages and the rest of mankind for some weird reason have decided to try and live their lives by those religions.
But hey take comfort. Satanism is a religion which does not suggest you give any money to anybody.
"Unless you care to match his contributions, I kindly invite you to shut the hell up."
I give a greater percentage of my income then he does. It certainly hurts me more to give then it does him. I truly feel that I am morally superior to him in terms of giving. Besides every cent I earned I earned honestly. That's not something he can say.
People always bring this up so what the hell I have karma to burn....
1) Bill Gates didn't give one cent to charity until after the trial started. 2) The foundation is not Bill Gates. 3) Bill Gates does not take money out of his pocket to give to charity. He gives stock to the foundation which then sells the stock and gives away the money. Bill is giving away POTENTIAL INCOME not money he already has. 4) Bill still gives away a smaller percent of his fortune then most regular americans do, he just happens to be obscenely rich due mainly to his lack of "business ethics". 5) The bible is peppered with sayings about how the poor man who gives away a shekel is more moral then the rich who gives more. The phrase "give till it hurts" comes to mind and I don't think anybody is arguing that Bill is hurting. 6) Many otherwise sick, deranged, sleazy, people have given lots of money to charities. Osama immediately comes to mind as does Ken Lay and a countless drug lords in south america. Giving away some small percentage of you money does not undo all the harm you have done. People who have gotten ill gains frequently give a lot of money to charity to try and win public support. 7) If I make 30K a year and I give away 10% of my income I am going to suffer. That three thousand dollars would be three months worth of rent in most places in the US. If I was worth a 100 billion dollars and I gave away 90% of money I would still have 10 BILLION DOLLARS. If I gave away 99% of my money I would still have a billion dollars. Can you live on a billion dollars? I know I can.
So excuse me if I am not all that impressed that Bill G after charging monopoly prices to billions of people gives away two or three percent of his earning to charity. I am glad you are so impressed though. His PR machine must be working.
Slashdot Mirror
Well it's no use talking to you. It's now pretty apparent that you are an astro turfer or a shill. Let's hope you are an astro turfer so at least you are getting paid to believe a proven liar.
Buy hey don't let that stop you from calling other people islamic fundamentalist just because they don't believe a MS executive.
"but until the future actually happens you are unable to know for sure. However earlier, by your own admission, you said that nothing could change your mind."
I never said such a thing. You are now making up things you think I said which is the sign of a true zealot.
As I said though. It is more reasonable to think the he is lying again then to think that he is telling the truth this time. It is you who are acting like islamic fundamentalist fanatic.
Fanatics tend to believe things that they have no evidence for and they tend to ignore any evidence presented to them which contradicts their beliefs.
I am afraid in this case there is no comparison. You are the fanatic zealot for completely ignoring all the past statements of MS and Mr Mundie and now accepting without any evidence whatsoever that Mr Mundie and MS have done a complete 180 degree turnaround.
Yes you compared me to a islamic fundamentalist because I think mundie is lying again and because I have pointed out that he has lied at least a dozen times in the press already.
It seems to me that perhaps you are more like a islamic fundamentalist then I am. After all accepting the word of a known and habitual liar without any hesitation whatsoever is an act of zealotry. It's very similar to believe who still follow preachers who predict the end of the earth even when the day passes without incident.
Of the two of us I would say you are the true zealot. I base my beliefs of what somebody has done in the past. If somebody lies to me a dozen times then it's reasonable for me to believe that they are lying again. It's unreasonable for you to accept that they are telling the truth now.
I am afraid in this case you are islamic terrorist and not me.
YES!. I am exactly like a terrorist!. There is absolutely no difference at all between my looking at mundies track record on the truth and deciding that he is probably lying again and blowing up a building killing three thousand people!. Those two acts are indisguishable from each other. There is no difference whatsoever!. I am exactly like a islamic fundamentalist.
You on the other hand can read minds!.
"he problem with your argument is that no matter what MS does you will not be convinced that they are playing nice with the GPL, and thus it is not falsifiable, and hence not rational."
Right. I won't and I am guessing most people won't either. Since we all lack the ability to read his mind we have to guess at which if the possibilites are more likely. Perhaps you have some special skill which allows you to read his mind and know for sure that he has changed his mind and is now sincerely interested in playing nice with the GPL. Please let us know how your super human powers of mind reading have convinced you that he is not lying this time.
I am afraid the rest of us who do not share your amazing powers of mind reading will have to simply make do with taking a look at his past track records and making judgements on based on that.
"Also, I fail to see what a vote has to do with the truth; if popular opinion did reflect the truth science would be much simpler. Special relativity? Let's take a vote."
YOu missed my point entirely. The vote was not on what is the truth, it's was what is more likely.
Is it more likely that...
1) Mundie is lieing?
2) MS has changed their tune and wants to play nice with GPL?
My bet is on 2.
So what happened? Did God speak to him last night and pointed out the error of his ways? Exactly how does one change such fundamentally held beliefs in such a short time anyway?
I think occams razor applies here. He has lied dozens of times in the press already. What's more likely? he is lieing now or he has truly changed his mind and now wants to make sure all MS products can work with GPLed software.
Let's take a vote.
Looks it's a computer journal. The job of a computer journal is not to ask hard hitting questions. It's to suck up to your advertisers and to make sure you get their press releases published as articles and to generally act as their publicity agents.
If Ms wants to play nice all they have to do is the publish some specs. NTFS, SMB, Active Directory, Office file formats etc. I mean full disclosure. They could also remove the DRM from their file formats which prevents open office from even attempting to open their files.
Ask yourself this question. Is a company which makes sure that the sample files it ships with office can only be opened up with MS office serious about playing nice? I don't think so. NOTE TO SHILLS: The previous statement has nothing to with the capability, the files are locked and refuse to be opened by open office.
Anyway this is Mundie we are talking about. If he doesn't lie a dozen times by lunch he feels quesy.
LOL. It was not the software industry. Everything I said applies to most large coporations though.
The larger the corporation you work for the less people matter. I have worked for some large corporation and I have no idea how they kept going. Their products were crap, nobody gave a damn, the workers were treated like shit, the customers worse. Despite all that they kept winning large contracdts and their profits were going up. Their products and services are measurably inferior to the competitions and they cost more but the customers kept choosing them because they were a big company.
A large company build it's own momentum. People buy the products and services because they think a large company will be more reliable or something. It's crazy.
Anyway a programmer no matter how brilliant just does not matter to a large corporation. If anything they are a liability because they will be disruptive to the crappy programmers and will not enjoy using the chosen bondage language (java, c# or VB.NET).
Smart people matter to small companies.
"Like I said. I didn't think you would agree and that's ok. The system didn't side in your favor so you cry foul."
No the system didn't side with humanity. Instead corrupt officials subverted the justice system after taking bribes.
"Apple has been very successful using 3rd party slave labor to make a killing on their iPods."
Slaves? Do you have a link to that? I would be very interested in american companies using slave labor. I know for sure many american companies use prison labor in the US and elsewhere but I have never heard of using actual slaves.
"So even by your measure they are very unethical. I agree with you there."
Give me a link to apple using using slaves and I will agree. I wonder if MS uses third party slaves for packaging, marketing, pressing CDs, etc.
SO you plug your Ipod into windows. It then proceeds to delete all your songs on it.
I sure hope MS does that.
"Possibly just because there's money to be made."
Most MS divisions don't make money. Most MS products are free. MS makes profit on windows and office and uses that to subsidize all their other products.
"No exception needs to be made for Bill because I don't agree that your assertion fits. It's not like he robbed a bank and shot people in the process. He was just very successfully competitive in a very competitive industry."
He ripped off millions of people by abusing his monopoly.
"If you are of the mind (as I think you are) that MS has done a great wrong and was rightly convicted the fact that all parties came to settlement means the social harm has been atoned for. Either way it is behind us."
I disagree. By bribing govt officials MS arrainged for itself a light slap on the wrist. To me this is nothing short of subversion of democracy.
"If you really think he is evil and just set up his charity work to get on the good side of public opinion why does he continue?"
Either because there are still many people who think that he has not rehabilitated himself or he himself feels guilty. Either way neigher him or MS have changed their ways. MS continues to be one of the most unethical and sleazy corporations in the world.
"If he wanted to he could sit back and be a prick with his money like Steve Jobs"
YEs steve jobs is a prick. I mean look at all the fucked up things he does. Now what does he do with him money that got you all pissed off at him again?
"On the other hand, Steve hasn't been successful enough to do nearly as much social good so it doesn't really matter."
It's been my experience that in the corporate world less morals or ethics you have the more successful you become. That's why the kind old man who runs the shoe repair shop in my neighborhood is till scratching a living and Bill G is the richest man in the world.
"Clearly, though, you feel that he doesn't give enough. What, then, would be enough? How many billions of dollars must Bill Gates give away in order to get your approval?"
I think he should give away all of it. Every cent. It all comes from ripping off people. It's all bad money.
"My guess is that you (and most people here) will always demonize Gates regardless of any enormous positive impact he ends up making on the world. That isn't moral superiority; that's enmity."
Osama funded orphanages, drug lords in south america fund all kinds of charitites. Giving away your ill gotten gains is a common tactic to win public approval. It doesn't impress me. If Bill really wants to impress me he could split up his company, he could publish the specs for NTFS, NTFS, DOC etc, he could provide a "save as ODF" feature to office. He could do a thousand things that demonstrate that he is no longer willing to rip off the billions of people who are paying monopoly level prices for his products.
He doesn't do any of that because he still wants those billions pouring into his pocket. Sure he gives away some it but that's easy when you make ten billion a year.
You said it doesn't matter. Why do you make an exception for Bill? Is is because what he did was merely white collar crime? Is it because "all" he did was rip off billions of people a little at a time?
Ok then. If you are happy being one of the kewl kids of /. who piss on RMS safely tucked away in their mothers basement then more power to you.
I was just giving you ideas of how you could really piss on him. You know publicly humiliate him and make him notice you.
"Oh, I forgot - having/exploiting a monopoly is a mortal sin that no amount of penance could ever attone for."
I am glad you agree his giving is penance.
"Heck, he's given away 1/3 of his fortune"
He has given away 1/3rd of his stock. Stock that he paid nothing for. Let's be accurate here.
If I had a hundred billion dollars I would be happy to turn over a years salary. Hell I would be happy to turn over 100 years of salary. Hell I would be happy to turn over 99 billion dollars to you.
I would still have a billion dollars and I think I would get by on that.
Every day hundreds of millions of Americans wake up and go to work. They earn good honest money doing good honest work and they pay their taxes. Out of those taxes hundreds of billions go to provide food stamps, health care, heating oil, transportation, clean water, vaccinations, and a slew of other services for the poor and indigent of the world. Hundreds of billions. Furthermore the combined charitable output of those hundreds of millions of americans dwarfs Bills.
That's the cathedral and the bazaar for you. I am more impressed with my neighbor who gets up every day and sits in a parking lot all day come rain or shine then I am with Bill G. If Bill G decided not to charge monopoly prices for his goods then those hundreds of billions of people would have a few extra cents in their pockets.
Glad you are so impressed with his giving though.
"It matters not what you think of MS and how he got his money."
Really? You honestly think it doesn't matter how you get the money as long as you give two percent to charity?
What makes you think I decide how much you give? How much you give is up to you. I must say though that for last couple of thousand years religions such as christianity, islam and budhism have suggested certain percentages and the rest of mankind for some weird reason have decided to try and live their lives by those religions.
But hey take comfort. Satanism is a religion which does not suggest you give any money to anybody.
"Unless you care to match his contributions, I kindly invite you to shut the hell up."
I give a greater percentage of my income then he does. It certainly hurts me more to give then it does him. I truly feel that I am morally superior to him in terms of giving. Besides every cent I earned I earned honestly. That's not something he can say.
That could simply mean that the founders of google have decided not to take too much money out of the corporation.
People always bring this up so what the hell I have karma to burn....
1) Bill Gates didn't give one cent to charity until after the trial started.
2) The foundation is not Bill Gates.
3) Bill Gates does not take money out of his pocket to give to charity. He gives stock to the foundation which then sells the stock and gives away the money. Bill is giving away POTENTIAL INCOME not money he already has.
4) Bill still gives away a smaller percent of his fortune then most regular americans do, he just happens to be obscenely rich due mainly to his lack of "business ethics".
5) The bible is peppered with sayings about how the poor man who gives away a shekel is more moral then the rich who gives more. The phrase "give till it hurts" comes to mind and I don't think anybody is arguing that Bill is hurting.
6) Many otherwise sick, deranged, sleazy, people have given lots of money to charities. Osama immediately comes to mind as does Ken Lay and a countless drug lords in south america. Giving away some small percentage of you money does not undo all the harm you have done. People who have gotten ill gains frequently give a lot of money to charity to try and win public support.
7) If I make 30K a year and I give away 10% of my income I am going to suffer. That three thousand dollars would be three months worth of rent in most places in the US. If I was worth a 100 billion dollars and I gave away 90% of money I would still have 10 BILLION DOLLARS. If I gave away 99% of my money I would still have a billion dollars. Can you live on a billion dollars? I know I can.
So excuse me if I am not all that impressed that Bill G after charging monopoly prices to billions of people gives away two or three percent of his earning to charity. I am glad you are so impressed though. His PR machine must be working.
I don't mean to "get your goat". I am just trying to help you out. Surely there has to be a better way for you to demean RMS then to join the /. herd.