...at the mass absence of a sense of humor by my fellow/.-ers. These guys (Decadent Action) are a riot! And, no, Joshua, this isn't an Open Source thing -- that's why Rob used this graphic for the article, though the Gilliam-esque giant foot might have fit as well.
It's Easter Sunday (Happy Easter to all! He is risen indeed, etc, etc...), a very special day to some people. So it's interesting to see all the offended reactions at a bunch of performance artists who dare to poke some fun at what is apparently the Great Y*hw*h of the West -- El Capitalismo!
Browse through the site. Read the articles and the press clippings. Enjoy! The best humor often contains a grain or two of truth. (I also recommend Petreley's April Fools column, if you haven't seen it yet).
The prison population is at record levels, I think. It's a drain on the numbers of unemployed. "Employment" means what, anyway? If someone works two hours, do they count as employed as well? If a family has multi-breadwinners holding down multi jobs, that's a lot of employment, but does that compare well to the old paradigm of a single breadwinner earning enough to supply the family's needs? Since it's harder to get unemployment benefits than in olden times, wouldn't that mean that the measure of unemployment is lowballed compared to those olden times? There is a segment of the population that has "fallen off the map"; they aren't counted in the figures.
I think the guy from West Philly was talking about the difference between statistics and real life. I didn't read the article linked to the top of the thread, but since Greenspan was the impetus for this part of the thread, I'll mention this: Greenspan likes to speak of job insecurity as a Good Thing. It keeps wage demands down in general, which helps keep inflation down. While the numbers bear him out, I'm not happy with his cold-blooded logic. There is no discussion about why this particular low level of inflation is needed; its desirability is taken as a given.
I won't try to draw a line from "Good Economic Numbers" to "Urban Decay" - I'm sure economists like Ken Galbraith and Doug Henwood (et mucho alia, including non-economists like Chomsky, I suppose) have written volumes that would better explain it. To ask someone to do it here is a sucker's bet - and it's sort of a time-wasting wiseass question. (Though I will point out that Perot's famed "Giant Sucking Sound" -- which contributes to Greenspan's beloved "job insecurity" -- refers, in part, to jobs that, in the past, brought some degree of prosperity to the inner city). As someone who has spent time in some horrid parts of the Bronx, Manhattan, Newark, Baltimore, and the rural South during the stock market booms of the 60's and 80's, I can testify to the well-fed's willful disconnect between good numbers and real life.
I see an increasingly brittle economy. I'd love to just bask in Dow 10,000, a healthy portfolio, and Labor Department figures and not intuit the brittleness that I do. Look at Japan, Australia, Paraguay, Ecuador, Brazil... it is, after all, a global economy, right? There's a lot of bad numbers out there.
I guess the acid test will be the inevitable downturn. Congress had to coerce Bush into signing supplemental bills to provide unemployment benefits for people during the last recession -- the result of tightening eligibility rules. I think much more extensive activity will occur next time. It won't be pretty. I'd love to be proven wrong. We'll see.
Why does the average computer user need free software? By his definition, free software is freedom to customize the software to do as you wish.
It means the software is free, as in wild horses.
This means source code must be modified. Since when is programming a simple skill that anyone can learn, or would want to? The average computer user needs to be able to do their email, web browsing, word processing, and maybe some accounting. As long as they are not restricted by the capabilities in the current choices for these programs, RMS is wasting his breath and our time.
The average user doesn't exist in a vacuum. There might be a case where that user's neighbor, cousin, barber, or priest is savvy enough to make sense of the code; there might be a desire, a year or two down the road, where that user might want new functionality for a piece of software. In the proprietary model, he/she would have to buy an upgrade or a competing product, and still not be satisfied. If the desired new functionality were just something that could have been hacked (by the barber) using the existing code, it would come faster and in a made-to-order fashion.
So there's one impromptu example of the usefulness of sharing the code. As far as "RMS wasting his breath", he only wastes it when he obsesses about the name of Linux. His other efforts seem more oriented towards keeping those wild horses free. It's not necessarily about winning popularity contests or gaining acceptance from a hostile audience. It's about the horses.
The Linux kiddies are fond to point out that with open source, you can modify and hack your own software. I've always wondered if the people from whose mouths I hear this actually do so.
I don't have any Linux (kernel) examples, but I have two small examples of the useful hackability of open source. I had an old binary of ezppp-1.0B9 that I've relied on for dialing my ISP; I've grown quite attached to it, since I'm extremely clueless in setting up PPP using other tools. The binary stopped working when I upgraded to RH5.2 (SIGSEGV!), but I had the old source, though I'd never used it before.
It didn't compile, so I was screwed, since there was no newer version of the source. The problem turned out to be a matter of the syntax of one line of code - my guess is that it compiled properly with the (earlier) version of Qt that existed when it was written, but maybe a slight tweak in the Qt API since then made it necessary to change that one line of ezppp code. The first reference implementation of MPEG-4 audio that I used didn't seem to have Linux in mind (later versions were Linux-friendly); I had to tweak some of the headers (e.g. #define PI atan(1.0) * 4.0 and some other minor things, IIRC). I was really eager to have a "look" at VQF and AAC, but would not have had the chance to do so (on Linux, my OS of choice) had I not had the code. So having the source can be a necessary thing. No, I didn't hack it into something new and wonderful to give to the world; I merely had the chance to make a couple of pieces of important (to me) software compile properly on a platform for which it was not designed.
sn't this about the point in the script where Microsoft swoops down and finishes off the rest of the Internet?
If jwz's words can function as some sort of wakeup call to AOL, then maybe that script goes out the window. I guess it's a little too late to release any 4.x code (see Excuse #2), but how about a Manhattan Project to ship ASAP a 5.0 that's as great as Gecko is supposed to be? Presumably AOL has the resources to do this. Do they have the will?
Everything is politics-related. Just because everyone is apathetic doesn't mean "political BS" wasn't involved - it just means they've tuned out the BS and harbor the delusion that the status quo merely landed on their doorstep. Maybe it came by divine fiat or something.
Businesses explicitly buy into the BS when they're offered goodies by pols - payroll tax cuts, for instance, or a look-the-other-way ethos towards regulation, as some US locales (and many Third World countries do). They buy into the glorification of business by politicians; they even shell out campaign bucks to the pols who brown-nose the best.
If you think "People and businesses don't buy political BS", then you've probably swallowed a truckload of it. Your little piece of folk "wisdom" only shows that you don't have the wherewithal to pursue the causes and the effects. You must be an American.
Just finish HURD! Drop this "Name The OS" crap! Let it go!
I still luv RMS, but this has gotten out of hand. Too many people take this "controversy" as some sort of license (no pun intended) to tee off on the old guy. It's time for us to move on. That includes you too, Brother Stallman.
The essay was not a Big Deal. By titling my original post "STFU, please", I was echoing the unspoken sentiments of ESR's "farewell speech" (YMMV). But now having read the thing, and the parting paragraph (italics mine)...
Work on your kindness. Work on your trust.
When you see twits going on a rampage, speak up against it without descending to their level. Try to be forbearing, not just towards me and your other advocates and leaders (though we sure need it, we're human beings too and responsibility is heavy) but towards each other as well. The energy we spend on fighting each other is energy we're not spending on our work. We owe the world better; we've got a big job to do together. Let's get on with it.
...maybe "STFU" is a not-misplaced riposte. Had there been a public posting of APSL 0.x (maybe there was one and I missed it), maybe we wouldn't have had the "need" for Eric to air his gripes about everyone else's gripes. "We" didn't get the opportunity to emerge from the smoke-filled room with a "fully-formed" APSL 1.0, so I'll be quite happy to not belong to the "tribe" that ESR is "speaking" to.
If Eric can't stand the heat, the bazaar has an exit door. Three cheers for all the wonderful things he's done. But I don't care about "what will They think?"; I don't care about "winning" wars or World Domination; I don't care about adding to the Buzzword Files of miscellaneous PHBs and CEOs. Considering the general insensitivity of/. posters (and I'm not referring to The Kiddies), why should I suddenly become a bleeding-heart about peoples' desires to replace their workplace BSOD devices with Linux boxen? People are dying in the Balkans, enslaved in the Sudan, etc, etc, and I'm supposed to unconditionally cheer ESR on as he tries to "liberate" your workplaces?
I'm burning my tribal membership card. Good riddance to me. I will henceforth attempt to be an individual, one who is trying to use and write Free Software. Over and out.
Why did you post this? Do you think that ESR really doesn't understand what's going on? Do you think that his obvious generalization of slashdot readers as "kiddies" actually applied to everyone?
Rather than waste my time restating everything, I'll just say "read my other replies on this page". Brevity is kewl:)
If you're not going to bother reading something, don't bother commenting on it.
I read two paragraphs, deemed to be important by LT. I read the original essay, and found it to be overly petulant. More importantly, I've read literally dozens of great comments on/. in these past few weeks complaining about this or that aspect of ESR's latest Open Source® move. If he's pissed at legitimate content-free flames, fine - I'm with him. But if he wants to dismiss all complaints as "noise", he's no better than a disingenuous despot. When I hear of a "new and improved" ESR, I'll take the time to read him again. I've read enough for now; I know the drill.
It doesn't surprise me that you got censored by Linux Today... you're lucky Rob's more lenient than LT.
My LT post has now magically appeared. Maybe they're just not as quick as Slash in posting comments. Maybe they were on a lunch break. I don't know. I hereby apologize if I've insulted LT by my offhand remark. I hope to apologize to ESR someday, but I'm not holding my breath:)
If you'd taken the time to "sift through" his entire essay (which is probably considerably smaller than the incredible volume of flame mail that angry, immature Slashdotters can generate) you might have found plenty of useful gripes as well, including advice to read and think carefully before you flame.
Why don't we stop fixating on the "immature Slashdotters" and actually focus on ESR's job? If he can't handle the Bazaar when it bazaars him, maybe he should recant CatB. I would rather have the input of some of the better/. ESR-critics than have Eric "fight the good fight" on his own. If he insists on being the Lone Martyr, I no longer have time for him or his communiques.
If this is a "flame", then you know where you can stick it:)
I might read his article later. ESR's essays are no longer very high on my "to read" list.
Rudeness is like pouring sand into the gears of our social machinery. People who aren't mature seem to think politeness and civility are a waste of time. Our social system doesn't work all that well to begin with, and they are not helping.
Occasionally people do need to be slapped down, sometimes the harder the better. But I do mean occasionally. I wish more people would think a second or two before they unloaded the flamethrower.
It's not about rudeness, it's about content. There are great writers and orators who can be rude as hell, but in an edifying or entertaining way. Conversely, there are lots of ill-willed politicians, diplomats, writers, and others who can be as polite as a visitor to Buckingham Palace. Look past the surface. Sometimes a flame is not a flame. Sometimes politeness has sharp fangs. I won't go into one of my infrequent rants about how American schools seem to suck these days, but critical thinking seems to be at an all-time low in US society.
I saw the blurb at Linux Today earlier this afternoon; that's as far as I got. When I saw ESR's now-tired complaint about "taking arrows from the Slashdot kiddies and their spiritual kin", I knew I wouldn't be reading the entire article. Will he acknowledge the existence of well-reasoned and valid complaints about his work, or just continue working on his Diary of Sulk? If he insists on "publish early, publish often", he will be the victim of "flame early, flame often". But if he takes the time to sift through it, he'll find plenty of useful kibitzers amidst the flamage. I don't think he quite gets it yet.
Disclaimer: The original version of my post was apparently censored by Linux Today.
"Hi, my name is Anthony Michael Hall. I'm not a geek, but I'll be playing one on basic cable very soon. I'd like to talk to you about software, Open Source® software..."
Wouldn't it be perfect to have the guy who plays Gates be the OSS mouthpiece?
This is state-sponsored expropriation, plain and simple.
No it isn't. MS will likely be fairly compensated in any scenario, and, if not, you should consider any losses to be (in effect) the punitive damages for previous actions - actions that caused the DOJ case(s) to begin with. If there were no legit reason for all this, then you could fairly call it expropriation, but, then again, IANAL.
Remember, we're talking about intrusion in peoples' lives here, and the sidebar of party rhetoric being hot air for suckers.
The war on drugs is pure idiocy. You can't save a man from his own desires.
That's not the point. It's bipartisan idiocy, started by a GOP Prez. Can you name the original Drug Czar? And who coined the phrase "Just Say No"? Remember we're talking about intrusion here.
The democrats pushed to get the Independant Prosecutor statutes on the books, it just came back to bite them.
True.
Besides, Bill Clinton is THE exact model of what they had in mind when they wrote the law.(Excet they thought it would be a republican).
I don't think so. If a guy's sex life in in-bounds, somebody's intruding on someone's life. If this had been France, a mistress would have been no big deal. Remember, we're talking about intrusion here.
Is this a backdoor way to mention abortion? Tell me where in the US Constitution it is stated that a woman has the right to murder her own children?
Your words, more or less, are in the GOP platform. But it's intrusion. I'm pro-choice and anti-abortion. I don't like the government putting itself in the role of Womb Police; there are better, more humane ways to stop abortion. Or would you rather send abortionists and their patients to prison without parole? Give 'em The (Uncomfy) Chair?
Intelligence is important to all countries. Let me remind you that a democrat sent us into Vietnam.
I'm not here to defend Democrats - that's a typical kneejerk reaction, to assume that. It was a bipartisan effort, started by LBJ's subterfuge. But you didn't mention the Nixon, Ford, Eisenhower, Reagan, and Bush Administration's efforts in the other countries I mentioned. In the name of the Cold War or Kapital Über Alles, they fucked over numerous Third World countries, in ways that would make the Womb Police look like stuffed Tinky Winkys.
FUD & deciet from the GOP? That's a joke and a half. The Democrats have been scaring old people shitless with their lies about GOP sponsored Social security cuts which never existed. How about the GOP sponsored growth of the federal school lunch program that the congressional democrats characterized as cuts?
Both parties do that, but it was an invention of Reagan's people. If you're not giving COLAs and expanding the per-capita expenditure, it's probably a cut - even if the dollar amount goes up. It's a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too scenario: brag about the increase, and hope that no-one sees the frayed edges in the program.
What about the McCarthyite demonization of anyone to the left of Bob Dole? That's an example of FUD. Even the term "Liberal Republican" (which many were, once upon a time) has been FUD-ded out of existence.
How about the obvious and awful race baiting conducted by Jesse Jackson and Maxine Waters?
They don't represent the party. What about leaders like Trent Lott and Bob Barr sucking up to the CCC (a latter-day White Citizens Council). What about the party's Southern Strategy (1968-today), which opened up the Big Tent to disgruntled Dixiecrats (does the name Strom Thurmond ring a bell?), to the point that even (ex-KKK Grand Wotzit) David Duke has frequently been a viable GOP candidate?
Appearantly you don't get what it is to be a republican. Of course everyone should be a free thinker. To be a republican means to be a free thinkter and to freely choose to join the party.
Listen. I'm the offspring of Republicans. I've been around Republican pols (New York, New England, North Carolina) since I was in diapers. I read Buckley and Goldwater at an age when my classmates were reading Judy Blume. I'm old enough now to realize that politics is a business - one where winning counts a hell of a lot more than truth, fairness, or altruism - and many (perhaps even most) of its practitioners are as suspect as the suits and moguls we pillory here at/.
It doesn't say By their rhetoric ye shall know them in the Bible.
OK? Ditch the rose-colored shades, and do some thinking on your own.
Despite what they might consider objectionable all this free speech has certainly been a boon to true Goldwater conservatives...
I think Barry Morris Goldwater spins in his grave at the thought of so many "conservatives" trashing Goldwater Conservatism. He was pro-choice, remember? His idea of Free Speech was not about the freedom to shout "Fire!" in a crowded building, or "Fire!" where there was none - yet many "conservatives", on the Net or not, do just that - yes I refer to Rush and Drudge, but also to many forked-tongue pols and Rush-alikes. There are differences between Goldwater's conservatism and that of the New Right conservatives who birthed this current era; I think the Senator just went along for the ride, content that post-Watergate America didn't become a one-party state.
My 2
Errors in spelling / typing / grammar left intact. I'm in a hurry today.
Let me remind you all that the goal of the GOP is as few government intrusions into our lives as possible.
What about the War on Drugs, which trashes part of the Bill of Rights, and even has judges pissed at the intrusion into their work lives?
What about egging on Ken Starr to invade the lives of people?
What about intrusion into the lives of women, who have their reproductive rights tinkerred with?
What about intrusions into the lives of people all around the world, whose governments and economies have been trashed by the CIA and other wonderful GOP-sent Americans (many Democrats are guilty as well)? Does Chile ring a bell? Nicaragua? Iran? Vietnam? Jamaica?
What about the CDA? Were Republicans all lined up to denounce the thing?
Despite many of my political heroes being Republican, they have become the Party of FUD and Deceit in the past two decades. The Democrats are only slightly better, but they'll have to get worse if they are to win elections on a more consistent basis. That's pretty sickening, isn't it?
Anyone who says "Republicans Rule" (or "Democrats...", or "Libertarians...", etc) is missing the point. A bunch of lockstep ideology-zombies will more likely do more harm than good. What is needed is genius and deliberation, not scripts and spin.
...and the comment about american's being "afraid" of comunism.. hahahah.. of course we are.. tell me one place in the world that is has been sucessful. thats all i am aware of is failures.
If we could poll all 5+ billion people in the world, I'd think you would see a massive thumbs-down for capitalism. It may work in a relative handful of countries (and, even in those places, you'll find many negative votes), but what does the average person in Malawi, Honduras, Malaysia, or Pakistan think? "We" are not the center of the universe, and the world (and "we") might begin to improve once that fact sinks in.
He isn't always on-target or on-topic. He needs an editor sometimes. But he shouldn't be lumped in with all the trolls and semi-literate script kiddies. I wish/. moderators would stop deleting his posts (I think you guys have gone beyond "moderating" them).
Someone from Oxfam told me that Nike were one of the few companies that _don't_ employ slave labour in miserable conditions.
For this reason I bought Nikes instead of other shoes.
I've lumped slavery and "neo-slavery" together. Nike's not the worst practitioner - they don't use real slaves, but their history shows a constant search for a Lowest Common Denominator of labor laws. They move their manufacturing from place to place as they find a sweeter deal in another country.
I use Matthew 7:12 (the "Golden Rule") as my rule of thumb: would you be willing to work in one of the plants that Nike uses to manufacture their goods? Would you want to be paid less than a dollar an hour? Would you like to be exposed to toxic chemicals, ones that might leave you with a serious respiratory ailment when you reach middle age? Would you like being "disciplined" by one of the managers? I don't think you would. Nike does this stuff because they can get away with it, as do dozens of other companies. I don't think there's any valid economic reason to do it - they're just deathly afraid of having to pay a unionized workforce a living wage, and too cheap to deal with issues like workplace safety and payroll taxes on Western (government-regulated) terms.
As I said in a previous post, the only difference between this and slavery is that no-one hunts down the escapees.
Slashdot Mirror
It's Easter Sunday (Happy Easter to all! He is risen indeed, etc, etc...), a very special day to some people. So it's interesting to see all the offended reactions at a bunch of performance artists who dare to poke some fun at what is apparently the Great Y*hw*h of the West -- El Capitalismo!
Browse through the site. Read the articles and the press clippings. Enjoy! The best humor often contains a grain or two of truth. (I also recommend Petreley's April Fools column, if you haven't seen it yet).
--
I think the guy from West Philly was talking about the difference between statistics and real life. I didn't read the article linked to the top of the thread, but since Greenspan was the impetus for this part of the thread, I'll mention this: Greenspan likes to speak of job insecurity as a Good Thing. It keeps wage demands down in general, which helps keep inflation down. While the numbers bear him out, I'm not happy with his cold-blooded logic. There is no discussion about why this particular low level of inflation is needed; its desirability is taken as a given.
I won't try to draw a line from "Good Economic Numbers" to "Urban Decay" - I'm sure economists like Ken Galbraith and Doug Henwood (et mucho alia, including non-economists like Chomsky, I suppose) have written volumes that would better explain it. To ask someone to do it here is a sucker's bet - and it's sort of a time-wasting wiseass question. (Though I will point out that Perot's famed "Giant Sucking Sound" -- which contributes to Greenspan's beloved "job insecurity" -- refers, in part, to jobs that, in the past, brought some degree of prosperity to the inner city). As someone who has spent time in some horrid parts of the Bronx, Manhattan, Newark, Baltimore, and the rural South during the stock market booms of the 60's and 80's, I can testify to the well-fed's willful disconnect between good numbers and real life.
I see an increasingly brittle economy. I'd love to just bask in Dow 10,000, a healthy portfolio, and Labor Department figures and not intuit the brittleness that I do. Look at Japan, Australia, Paraguay, Ecuador, Brazil... it is, after all, a global economy, right? There's a lot of bad numbers out there.
I guess the acid test will be the inevitable downturn. Congress had to coerce Bush into signing supplemental bills to provide unemployment benefits for people during the last recession -- the result of tightening eligibility rules. I think much more extensive activity will occur next time. It won't be pretty. I'd love to be proven wrong. We'll see.
--
It means the software is free, as in wild horses.
This means source code must be modified. Since when is programming a simple skill that anyone can learn, or would want to? The average computer user needs to be able to do their email, web browsing, word processing, and maybe some accounting. As long as they are not restricted by the capabilities in the current choices for these programs, RMS is wasting his breath and our time.
The average user doesn't exist in a vacuum. There might be a case where that user's neighbor, cousin, barber, or priest is savvy enough to make sense of the code; there might be a desire, a year or two down the road, where that user might want new functionality for a piece of software. In the proprietary model, he/she would have to buy an upgrade or a competing product, and still not be satisfied. If the desired new functionality were just something that could have been hacked (by the barber) using the existing code, it would come faster and in a made-to-order fashion.
So there's one impromptu example of the usefulness of sharing the code. As far as "RMS wasting his breath", he only wastes it when he obsesses about the name of Linux. His other efforts seem more oriented towards keeping those wild horses free. It's not necessarily about winning popularity contests or gaining acceptance from a hostile audience. It's about the horses.
Disclaimer: I really need my nap :)
--
I don't have any Linux (kernel) examples, but I have two small examples of the useful hackability of open source. I had an old binary of ezppp-1.0B9 that I've relied on for dialing my ISP; I've grown quite attached to it, since I'm extremely clueless in setting up PPP using other tools. The binary stopped working when I upgraded to RH5.2 (SIGSEGV!), but I had the old source, though I'd never used it before.
It didn't compile, so I was screwed, since there was no newer version of the source. The problem turned out to be a matter of the syntax of one line of code - my guess is that it compiled properly with the (earlier) version of Qt that existed when it was written, but maybe a slight tweak in the Qt API since then made it necessary to change that one line of ezppp code. The first reference implementation of MPEG-4 audio that I used didn't seem to have Linux in mind (later versions were Linux-friendly); I had to tweak some of the headers (e.g. #define PI atan(1.0) * 4.0 and some other minor things, IIRC). I was really eager to have a "look" at VQF and AAC, but would not have had the chance to do so (on Linux, my OS of choice) had I not had the code. So having the source can be a necessary thing. No, I didn't hack it into something new and wonderful to give to the world; I merely had the chance to make a couple of pieces of important (to me) software compile properly on a platform for which it was not designed.
--
OK?
--
--
If jwz's words can function as some sort of wakeup call to AOL, then maybe that script goes out the window. I guess it's a little too late to release any 4.x code (see Excuse #2), but how about a Manhattan Project to ship ASAP a 5.0 that's as great as Gecko is supposed to be? Presumably AOL has the resources to do this. Do they have the will?
--
Businesses explicitly buy into the BS when they're offered goodies by pols - payroll tax cuts, for instance, or a look-the-other-way ethos towards regulation, as some US locales (and many Third World countries do). They buy into the glorification of business by politicians; they even shell out campaign bucks to the pols who brown-nose the best.
If you think "People and businesses don't buy political BS", then you've probably swallowed a truckload of it. Your little piece of folk "wisdom" only shows that you don't have the wherewithal to pursue the causes and the effects. You must be an American.
--
I still luv RMS, but this has gotten out of hand. Too many people take this "controversy" as some sort of license (no pun intended) to tee off on the old guy. It's time for us to move on. That includes you too, Brother Stallman.
--
If Eric can't stand the heat, the bazaar has an exit door. Three cheers for all the wonderful things he's done. But I don't care about "what will They think?"; I don't care about "winning" wars or World Domination; I don't care about adding to the Buzzword Files of miscellaneous PHBs and CEOs. Considering the general insensitivity of /. posters (and I'm not referring to The Kiddies), why should I suddenly become a bleeding-heart about peoples' desires to replace their workplace BSOD devices with Linux boxen? People are dying in the Balkans, enslaved in the Sudan, etc, etc, and I'm supposed to unconditionally cheer ESR on as he tries to "liberate" your workplaces?
I'm burning my tribal membership card. Good riddance to me. I will henceforth attempt to be an individual, one who is trying to use and write Free Software. Over and out.
--
Rather than waste my time restating everything, I'll just say "read my other replies on this page". Brevity is kewl :)
--
I read two paragraphs, deemed to be important by LT. I read the original essay, and found it to be overly petulant. More importantly, I've read literally dozens of great comments on /. in these past few weeks complaining about this or that aspect of ESR's latest Open Source® move. If he's pissed at legitimate content-free flames, fine - I'm with him. But if he wants to dismiss all complaints as "noise", he's no better than a disingenuous despot. When I hear of a "new and improved" ESR, I'll take the time to read him again. I've read enough for now; I know the drill.
It doesn't surprise me that you got censored by Linux Today ... you're lucky Rob's more lenient than LT.
My LT post has now magically appeared. Maybe they're just not as quick as Slash in posting comments. Maybe they were on a lunch break. I don't know. I hereby apologize if I've insulted LT by my offhand remark. I hope to apologize to ESR someday, but I'm not holding my breath :)
--
Why don't we stop fixating on the "immature Slashdotters" and actually focus on ESR's job? If he can't handle the Bazaar when it bazaars him, maybe he should recant CatB. I would rather have the input of some of the better /. ESR-critics than have Eric "fight the good fight" on his own. If he insists on being the Lone Martyr, I no longer have time for him or his communiques.
If this is a "flame", then you know where you can stick it :)
I might read his article later. ESR's essays are no longer very high on my "to read" list.
--
Occasionally people do need to be slapped down, sometimes the harder the better. But I do mean occasionally. I wish more people would think a second or two before they unloaded the flamethrower.
It's not about rudeness, it's about content. There are great writers and orators who can be rude as hell, but in an edifying or entertaining way. Conversely, there are lots of ill-willed politicians, diplomats, writers, and others who can be as polite as a visitor to Buckingham Palace. Look past the surface. Sometimes a flame is not a flame. Sometimes politeness has sharp fangs. I won't go into one of my infrequent rants about how American schools seem to suck these days, but critical thinking seems to be at an all-time low in US society.
2 deposited.
--
Disclaimer: The original version of my post was apparently censored by Linux Today.
--
"Hi, my name is Anthony Michael Hall. I'm not a geek, but I'll be playing one on basic cable very soon. I'd like to talk to you about software, Open Source® software..."
Wouldn't it be perfect to have the guy who plays Gates be the OSS mouthpiece?
Disclaimer: Scatterized for your protection.
--
I say we should all pitch in for some sort of spokesperson-gene implant for RMS :)
Maybe these words might apply to ESR and his "farewell speech":
--
No it isn't. MS will likely be fairly compensated in any scenario, and, if not, you should consider any losses to be (in effect) the punitive damages for previous actions - actions that caused the DOJ case(s) to begin with. If there were no legit reason for all this, then you could fairly call it expropriation, but, then again, IANAL.
--
Check out the Inferno FAQ. You may have to search for "Plan 9" in the text.
--
The war on drugs is pure idiocy. You can't save a man from his own desires.
That's not the point. It's bipartisan idiocy, started by a GOP Prez. Can you name the original Drug Czar? And who coined the phrase "Just Say No"? Remember we're talking about intrusion here.
The democrats pushed to get the Independant Prosecutor statutes on the books, it just came back to bite them.
True.
Besides, Bill Clinton is THE exact model of what they had in mind when they wrote the law.(Excet they thought it would be a republican).
I don't think so. If a guy's sex life in in-bounds, somebody's intruding on someone's life. If this had been France, a mistress would have been no big deal. Remember, we're talking about intrusion here.
Is this a backdoor way to mention abortion? Tell me where in the US Constitution it is stated that a woman has the right to murder her own children?
Your words, more or less, are in the GOP platform. But it's intrusion. I'm pro-choice and anti-abortion. I don't like the government putting itself in the role of Womb Police; there are better, more humane ways to stop abortion. Or would you rather send abortionists and their patients to prison without parole? Give 'em The (Uncomfy) Chair?
Intelligence is important to all countries. Let me remind you that a democrat sent us into Vietnam.
I'm not here to defend Democrats - that's a typical kneejerk reaction, to assume that. It was a bipartisan effort, started by LBJ's subterfuge. But you didn't mention the Nixon, Ford, Eisenhower, Reagan, and Bush Administration's efforts in the other countries I mentioned. In the name of the Cold War or Kapital Über Alles, they fucked over numerous Third World countries, in ways that would make the Womb Police look like stuffed Tinky Winkys.
FUD & deciet from the GOP? That's a joke and a half. The Democrats have been scaring old people shitless with their lies about GOP sponsored Social security cuts which never existed. How about the GOP sponsored growth of the federal school lunch program that the congressional democrats characterized as cuts?
Both parties do that, but it was an invention of Reagan's people. If you're not giving COLAs and expanding the per-capita expenditure, it's probably a cut - even if the dollar amount goes up. It's a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too scenario: brag about the increase, and hope that no-one sees the frayed edges in the program.
What about the McCarthyite demonization of anyone to the left of Bob Dole? That's an example of FUD. Even the term "Liberal Republican" (which many were, once upon a time) has been FUD-ded out of existence.
How about the obvious and awful race baiting conducted by Jesse Jackson and Maxine Waters?
They don't represent the party. What about leaders like Trent Lott and Bob Barr sucking up to the CCC (a latter-day White Citizens Council). What about the party's Southern Strategy (1968-today), which opened up the Big Tent to disgruntled Dixiecrats (does the name Strom Thurmond ring a bell?), to the point that even (ex-KKK Grand Wotzit) David Duke has frequently been a viable GOP candidate?
Appearantly you don't get what it is to be a republican. Of course everyone should be a free thinker. To be a republican means to be a free thinkter and to freely choose to join the party.
Listen. I'm the offspring of Republicans. I've been around Republican pols (New York, New England, North Carolina) since I was in diapers. I read Buckley and Goldwater at an age when my classmates were reading Judy Blume. I'm old enough now to realize that politics is a business - one where winning counts a hell of a lot more than truth, fairness, or altruism - and many (perhaps even most) of its practitioners are as suspect as the suits and moguls we pillory here at /.
It doesn't say By their rhetoric ye shall know them in the Bible.
OK? Ditch the rose-colored shades, and do some thinking on your own.
--
I think Barry Morris Goldwater spins in his grave at the thought of so many "conservatives" trashing Goldwater Conservatism. He was pro-choice, remember? His idea of Free Speech was not about the freedom to shout "Fire!" in a crowded building, or "Fire!" where there was none - yet many "conservatives", on the Net or not, do just that - yes I refer to Rush and Drudge, but also to many forked-tongue pols and Rush-alikes. There are differences between Goldwater's conservatism and that of the New Right conservatives who birthed this current era; I think the Senator just went along for the ride, content that post-Watergate America didn't become a one-party state.
My 2
Errors in spelling / typing / grammar left intact. I'm in a hurry today.
--
What about the War on Drugs, which trashes part of the Bill of Rights, and even has judges pissed at the intrusion into their work lives?
What about egging on Ken Starr to invade the lives of people?
What about intrusion into the lives of women, who have their reproductive rights tinkerred with?
What about intrusions into the lives of people all around the world, whose governments and economies have been trashed by the CIA and other wonderful GOP-sent Americans (many Democrats are guilty as well)? Does Chile ring a bell? Nicaragua? Iran? Vietnam? Jamaica?
What about the CDA? Were Republicans all lined up to denounce the thing?
Despite many of my political heroes being Republican, they have become the Party of FUD and Deceit in the past two decades. The Democrats are only slightly better, but they'll have to get worse if they are to win elections on a more consistent basis. That's pretty sickening, isn't it?
Anyone who says "Republicans Rule" (or "Democrats...", or "Libertarians...", etc) is missing the point. A bunch of lockstep ideology-zombies will more likely do more harm than good. What is needed is genius and deliberation, not scripts and spin.
--
If we could poll all 5+ billion people in the world, I'd think you would see a massive thumbs-down for capitalism. It may work in a relative handful of countries (and, even in those places, you'll find many negative votes), but what does the average person in Malawi, Honduras, Malaysia, or Pakistan think? "We" are not the center of the universe, and the world (and "we") might begin to improve once that fact sinks in.
--
--
Someone from Oxfam told me that Nike were one of the few companies that _don't_ employ slave labour in miserable conditions.
For this reason I bought Nikes instead of other shoes.
I've lumped slavery and "neo-slavery" together. Nike's not the worst practitioner - they don't use real slaves, but their history shows a constant search for a Lowest Common Denominator of labor laws. They move their manufacturing from place to place as they find a sweeter deal in another country.
I use Matthew 7:12 (the "Golden Rule") as my rule of thumb: would you be willing to work in one of the plants that Nike uses to manufacture their goods? Would you want to be paid less than a dollar an hour? Would you like to be exposed to toxic chemicals, ones that might leave you with a serious respiratory ailment when you reach middle age? Would you like being "disciplined" by one of the managers? I don't think you would. Nike does this stuff because they can get away with it, as do dozens of other companies. I don't think there's any valid economic reason to do it - they're just deathly afraid of having to pay a unionized workforce a living wage, and too cheap to deal with issues like workplace safety and payroll taxes on Western (government-regulated) terms.
As I said in a previous post, the only difference between this and slavery is that no-one hunts down the escapees.
--