I scanned through the article, it didn't seem to mention how they tested the top proprietary software. I can well understand that there are are a lot of bugs in open source code since it is written by humans. But human also right the proprietary code. How did they test it?
Neglecting the fact that Google is already 'rich'. Copyright, in its current implementation seems to be in place simply for the rich to get richer. Yet most Americans are in the middle class. So I think its fair to assume that most US-Slashdotters are in the middle class. So how is it that laws, continued by rich, enforced by order of the rich, and that benifit mostly the rich get so much support on/. ? Does the money earned from copyright go directly back to the economy? I was of the (possibly incorrect) understanding that it just goes into the bank account of the rich.
The problem with what you saying is that people (as a whole) are quite comfortable with not knowing what nasties lay "out there". There have always been these things, in different forms. The will seemly cope by ignoring.
How sad do you have to be click on a link in a book? And people tell _me_ that I'm addicted to computers. When I read a book (volunteerily) I do it so as preference to reading from a screen.
is still a point of dismay to me. The least those involved could do was not call it sharing. I do not know much about economics, but I do not see how it benifits a society to not freely share and celebrate music and other forms of art.
How would anyone outside the project know that someone from inside the USA commited changes to version control to a projected hosted outside the USA? Also, who do all these patent problems benifit anyway? And is the USA simply firewalling themselves away from the rest of the world a viable option? Seems like it would make some corps happy.
Slashdot Mirror
The article was pretty clear on how they did the open source ones, but said nothing about how they did the closed source ones.
I scanned through the article, it didn't seem to mention how they tested the top proprietary software. I can well understand that there are are a lot of bugs in open source code since it is written by humans. But human also right the proprietary code. How did they test it?
Rihgttt....you had to install Firefox for him, but hhe knows how much memory it's taking up. Go back to doing drugs.
I'm pretty sure that what is developed is different from what is offered.
I guess you don't understand directly vs indirectly.
Neglecting the fact that Google is already 'rich'. Copyright, in its current implementation seems to be in place simply for the rich to get richer. Yet most Americans are in the middle class. So I think its fair to assume that most US-Slashdotters are in the middle class. So how is it that laws, continued by rich, enforced by order of the rich, and that benifit mostly the rich get so much support on /. ? Does the money earned from copyright go directly back to the economy? I was of the (possibly incorrect) understanding that it just goes into the bank account of the rich.
It wasn't supposed to me. I just failed to see what good me boasting about myself in public would do.
My parents limited me to _only_ holidays and vacations. I'm still in school, and not on the street. So I guess I did not turn out bad.
Don't get me wrong. I can think of reasons. But currently, the tech hasn't been implemented., so why would someone clcik on a link in a book today?
The problem with what you saying is that people (as a whole) are quite comfortable with not knowing what nasties lay "out there". There have always been these things, in different forms. The will seemly cope by ignoring.
Not just you. This seems so logical and expected.
How sad do you have to be click on a link in a book? And people tell _me_ that I'm addicted to computers. When I read a book (volunteerily) I do it so as preference to reading from a screen.
Intel -- Only "Open" For Business
$1700 seems steep, even for today's standards.
That's what I always thought. I just assumed there was more to it than that, so I was wrong.
I do not understand your post. How is "need access to the OS code" different from "given access to the relevant codebases" ?
is still a point of dismay to me. The least those involved could do was not call it sharing. I do not know much about economics, but I do not see how it benifits a society to not freely share and celebrate music and other forms of art.
Not complaining. However, your statement was very broad, as if everyone on Slashdot was guilty of what you spoke.
Keep in mind that you are mosting on an international website. Slashdot may be based in America, but we aren't all Americans.
There is much truth in what you speak. The nice thing about being in such a position to be corrupt is that people don't _want_ to believe it.
How this doesn't disqualify them (the government) from spreading "democracy" is beyong me.
How would anyone outside the project know that someone from inside the USA commited changes to version control to a projected hosted outside the USA? Also, who do all these patent problems benifit anyway? And is the USA simply firewalling themselves away from the rest of the world a viable option? Seems like it would make some corps happy.
Fedora opening a mailing list just for SELinux. You may want to head over there and ask.
Dude? Are you beeing paid to post this stuff? You already posted this on this article.
Could someone with good writing skills come up with a template for said email? Thanks.