"I'd be more inclined to compare an operating system kernel to the brainstem or spinal cord rather than the whole brain. Low-level functions and all that."
"Scenario two: I'm writing software. I come up with a brilliant idea and put it in my software. When I release it, someone else steals my idea for their own software and releases a competing product."
The concept that an idea can be "stolen" is quite unfortunate.
To demonstrate, imagine if you will some sort of cosmic Patent law which prevented organisms from "stealing each others ideas"... from cell division, to using tools. The universe would have never passed Go.
Patent law is a purely artificial construct. It exists at all only because it is able to rest on existing artificial constructs, such as the State.
The State is an apparatus of force which uses its accumulated, centralized power to maintain its own monolopies.
A true free market would be better for society and the human race as whole... if one was actualy concerned with mankind rather than one's own temporary little life and whatever extra profit one might accumulate through the use false laws.
Competition is good. Information wants to be free.
Unless an application is running on a system in which the processor design, motherboard schematics and BIOS firmware are 100% Open Source, it can not claim to be Open Source.
Sound reasonable?
It's called "argument of the beard"...
Everyone has a different point at which they split the hairs.
"Google sees a presence in Washington as a necessity as government becomes more involved in the Net's development."
So.... google goes and lobbies to further involve the government in the Net's development - thereby lending even more weight and leverage to the very phenomena that caused them to hire some weasel out of washington in the first place - brilliant.
Don't feed the Government.
It only encourages them.
"Ronald Reagan was right, the most frightening words in the English language are "Hi, I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.""
Sure, and funny he should say that.
Politicians are nothing other than outsourced extensions for big business.
Oh I forgot to mention - it becomes very obvious as to why Stallman is/was so obsessed with making everyone call Linux: "GNU/Linux"... strictly for mindshare.
I just read Stallman's GNU Manisfesto and I realized that if linux/oss (i.e. gnu software) eventually succeeds to the extent envisioned/hoped in the manifesto, that capitalism will take a serious ideological blow.
Under that light, the whole GNU/FSF experiment is somewhat a subversive idea. In essence, GNU in spirit, is anti-capitalist. Having observed the last 8 years of the open-source movement, and being an anarchist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
I realize more fully now why I've been so enthusiastic about free software / linux... it fits my politics so naturaly I almost didn't even notice.
It'll be very interesting to see what goes on - it's no wonder why the free-software movement is such a threat to many people/businesses.
"He got injured 3 times, in engagements which earned him bronze and silver stars, before being sent home."
"...engagements that earned him bronze and silver stars"???!
Do you really know the circumstances under which he received those awards? ( leave alone the very idea of getting rewarded in a situation/environment in which you are there to _kill_ people. )
Is that supposed to be some sort of indolent sarcasm??
Well, golly - because it's probable that the poster didn't spend any time in vietnam - he surely has no business disparaging Kerry's time there... That Kerry chose to go. That Kerry chooses to shamelessly politicize (i.e. whore out ) his time there. That Kerry quite likely didn't earn a damn thing while there, regardless of what he was handed.
As far as the topic as the two so called "candidates" being mostly the same, I believe Chomsky stated it quite well recently:
In the forthcoming presidential elections in the US, there is a
choice: between two candidates who were born to wealth and political
power, attended the same elite university, joined the same secret
society that instructs members in the style and manners of the
rulers, and are able to run because they are funded by largely the
same corporate powers.
Is my vote for any particular candidate any less arbitrary whether I decide to vote for that candidate because I like the way he styles his hair, than if I vote for him because I got $20 bucks?
And it's claimed that _this_ is the reason why SECRET ballot is justified??
What kind of transaction has EVER been legally binding without any form of signed contract as proof of accountability between cooperating parties?
A so called "ballot", made in secret, anonymously - with nothing whatsoever to show for it other than being added to a running tally of other similarly anonymous secret ballots - is, IN FACT, NOTHING AT ALL. A puff of vaporous smoke.
Such has been the state of our so called "democracy" since its very inception.
I adamantly assert that the whole process is illegitimate and a complete fraud. It simply holds no authority other than leverage and the threat of force.
Slashdot Mirror
"I'd be more inclined to compare an operating system kernel to the brainstem or spinal cord rather than the whole brain. Low-level functions and all that."
Linux is a monolithic kernel, not a micro-kernel.
"Scenario two: I'm writing software. I come up with a brilliant idea and put it in my software. When I release it, someone else steals my idea for their own software and releases a competing product."
The concept that an idea can be "stolen" is quite unfortunate.
To demonstrate, imagine if you will some sort of cosmic Patent law which prevented organisms from "stealing each others ideas" ... from cell division, to using tools. The universe would have never passed Go.
Patent law is a purely artificial construct. It exists at all only because it is able to rest on existing artificial constructs, such as the State.
The State is an apparatus of force which uses its accumulated, centralized power to maintain its own monolopies.
A true free market would be better for society and the human race as whole... if one was actualy concerned with mankind rather than one's own temporary little life and whatever extra profit one might accumulate through the use false laws.
Competition is good. Information wants to be free.
"[...]the Linux kernel (which is only a small part of a standard Linux configuration)."
... the mind reels.
Certainly, the Human brain is only a small part of a standard Human configuration.
Kinda reminds me of a Jack Handy quote: "The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth part of the face.
Right-on brutha...
I know it's early morning in the U.S., and gas prices suck... but lighten up, people!
It's called "argument of the beard"...
Everyone has a different point at which they split the hairs.
Too good to be true, I don't believe it. Bah.
And no, I didn't RTFA - so shutup.
(Aside: how many vi users out there have spuriously put "www, jjj, bbb, G " in their comments when they used the browser text widgets.)
Never let that happen again, use yzis and konqueror: http://yzis.org.free.fr/shots/khtml-textarea.jpg
"Google sees a presence in Washington as a necessity as government becomes more involved in the Net's development." So.... google goes and lobbies to further involve the government in the Net's development - thereby lending even more weight and leverage to the very phenomena that caused them to hire some weasel out of washington in the first place - brilliant. Don't feed the Government. It only encourages them.
A planet has to be round, and it has to be in an orbit, in outer-space.
"If people are stealing, then I want the government to use its powers to stop them."
Correct.
The government must not allow its monopoly of criminal activity, fraud and violence to be threatened.
"Ronald Reagan was right, the most frightening words in the English language are "Hi, I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."" Sure, and funny he should say that. Politicians are nothing other than outsourced extensions for big business.
The so called solution turns out to become much worse than the original problem.
Oh I forgot to mention - it becomes very obvious as to why Stallman is/was so obsessed with making everyone call Linux: "GNU/Linux" ... strictly for mindshare.
I just read Stallman's GNU Manisfesto and I realized that if linux/oss (i.e. gnu software) eventually succeeds to the extent envisioned/hoped in the manifesto, that capitalism will take a serious ideological blow.
Under that light, the whole GNU/FSF experiment is somewhat a subversive idea. In essence, GNU in spirit, is anti-capitalist. Having observed the last 8 years of the open-source movement, and being an anarchist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
I realize more fully now why I've been so enthusiastic about free software / linux ... it fits my politics so naturaly I almost didn't even notice.
It'll be very interesting to see what goes on - it's no wonder why the free-software movement is such a threat to many people/businesses.
"It's no good"
"It can't last"
Imagine a DMCA cluster of these!
"He got injured 3 times, in engagements which earned him bronze and silver stars, before being sent home."
"...engagements that earned him bronze and silver stars"???!
Do you really know the circumstances under which he received those awards? ( leave alone the very idea of getting rewarded in a situation/environment in which you are there to _kill_ people. )
What Kerry Really Did in Vietnam
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07292004.html
"How long were you there, my friend?"
Is that supposed to be some sort of indolent sarcasm??
Well, golly - because it's probable that the poster didn't spend any time in vietnam - he surely has no business disparaging Kerry's time there... That Kerry chose to go. That Kerry chooses to shamelessly politicize (i.e. whore out ) his time there. That Kerry quite likely didn't earn a damn thing while there, regardless of what he was handed.
As far as the topic as the two so called "candidates" being mostly the same, I believe Chomsky stated it quite well recently:
In the forthcoming presidential elections in the US, there is a choice: between two candidates who were born to wealth and political power, attended the same elite university, joined the same secret society that instructs members in the style and manners of the rulers, and are able to run because they are funded by largely the same corporate powers.
What exactly is wrong with vote buying?
Is my vote for any particular candidate any less arbitrary whether I decide to vote for that candidate because I like the way he styles his hair, than if I vote for him because I got $20 bucks?
And it's claimed that _this_ is the reason why SECRET ballot is justified??
What kind of transaction has EVER been legally binding without any form of signed contract as proof of accountability between cooperating parties?
A so called "ballot", made in secret, anonymously - with nothing whatsoever to show for it other than being added to a running tally of other similarly anonymous secret ballots - is, IN FACT, NOTHING AT ALL. A puff of vaporous smoke.
Such has been the state of our so called "democracy" since its very inception.
I adamantly assert that the whole process is illegitimate and a complete fraud. It simply holds no authority other than leverage and the threat of force.
How was it paid for? Tax payers money? Who exactly owns and controls the service? The city? And thus: the State? Sounds subversive to me.