Just because the war on some drugs is bought and paid for doesn't mean that laws and policies which escalate the war on some drugs don't get implemented. In fact, that seems to be the way it normally goes, just look at how much more violent the drug trade has become in the last few years, mexico is really getting fucked over by it.
If anti-drug drones become a standard part of the "war on drugs" - the US military is going to pay the price.
The drug lords make tens of billions of dollars each year. If drones start to significantly hurt their business, they will invest in the development of anti-drone technology. Once invented, it can't be un-invented and it isn't like its going to be stamped top-secret and kept in a scif either - it will spread to anyone who thinks they need to protect themselves from drones.
His point is that you have no evidence to back up your assertions regarding his character or motives.
Right, because people write "dear mods" to give moderators a special education intended only for them because they are such special people with educational needs distinct from everybody else on slashdot, not because they'll mod him down out of their own ignorance unlike non-moderators who can't act on their own ignorance.
Funny mods don't count towards karma. So sometimes people give other moderations instead. I would never do that myself - see my other post about making your joke and taking the moderations like a man.
My point was simply what I wrote - the original intent was not necessarily to promote mindless hate, but that hasn't stopped thousands of people from doing just that with them.
Dear mods, that's meant to be facetious. Some of you seem to be a little trigger-happy so you won't understand why I shouldn't have to explain that.
Make your joke and take the moderations like a man. If you are going to explain that it is a joke, you might as well not bother in the first place since explaining takes away all the fun.
They're not used to fuel hate, they're used to familiarize soldiers with the appearance of specific human beings so that they don't pass by unnoticed. Kind of like "wanted" posters, but made in a way that they're likely to be looked at more often.
Which is probably true of the original decks distributed to US soldiers in Iraq. But is definitely not true of the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands more decks sold on ebay and hundreds of websites to those who have zero chance of encountering the people depicted on the cards.
That is the point... sure if you only use GPL stuff internally it is technically true nobody can force your code out of you. The second you want to try your hand selling said internal application, you got screwed. Thus people are leery of using GPL code because it takes away those kinds of options.
Puh-lease. MUST we do this same old song and dance again?
Nobody can "force your code out of you" - at worst all that happens is that you are not licensed to distribute binaries and unless the GPL code owner has actually registered the copyright - which is highly unlikely for anything other than very high profile projects - your entire liability is limited to the income derived from the unlicensed distribution.
There is nothing stopping a shop from developing a program in house with GPL pieces and then replacing those pieces with something else if they don't want to provide source if they want to market it. Which is so uncommon anyway that as a percentage of in-house software, such cases are surely down in the hudredths of a percent range anyway.
It's human hair because, being at the top of the food chain, all those nasty chemicals like herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers collect in our bodies in the highest concentrations. Thus our hair is chock-full-o-chemicals. It's no wonder human hair mats have all these wondrous properties -- they are really just recycling all those chemicals we've been putting into the environment for the last 50 years.
That's actually not true. There's no obligation in the GPL for your competitor to give you any of their source code
Its really an extremely minor semantic point. He could have just as easily said, "your competitor can not prevent you from getting access to the source for their enhanced product." The crux of the matter is that anyone who modifies GPL software and attempts to distribute it does not maintain control over the source code to their modifications.
In either situation, I think peoples reactions of "zomg 9/11 part 2!!2@1!" were perfectly rational, but if you have an alternate hypothesis, I'm open to hearing it.
I can't speak for the asian countries since I've never been there, but according to http://www.internetworldstats.com/asia/th.htm, the situation in countries like Thailand is way better than what you describe (I didn't take the time to check the other countries). You'll find poor people with really bad jobs, that's true, but it's not the norm as most of the foreigners seem to think.
That link does not define what constitutes an "internet user" - but speaking about people I know with average jobs like school teachers, call center employees and accountants, they can't afford home computers with anything more than dial-up. If you look at the income numbers listed at that site - ~$210/month average for Thailand, ~$120/month average for philippines where DSL is at $15-$20/month - that's not affordable.
Philippines, thailand, cambodia, malaysia and indonesia.
Federico, a guy from Colombia (LA) with a standard 3Mb connection who doesn't work in a sweatshop making Nike shoes.
I'm willing to bet that for every 1 of you there are at least 99 more who aren't so lucky. In worse off places, I'm good with an estimate that's closer to 1 out of a thousand.
Let's examine what he claims: closed-source software is evil.
You are going to have to do a hell of a lot better than just use the word "evil." That's more biased phraseology designed to vastly oversimply his argument, making it essentially a strawman.
You think that logistics is the real problem. As has already been said, open source is necessary but not sufficient. Logistics is just another hurdle. But you will never get to the point where logistics can be dealt with without first insisting on open source.
For example, there are probably roughly just as many mechanics as there are software developers and yet, because the overwhelmingly vast majority of car buyers would not consider purchasing a car with the engine compartment welded shut the logistical issue of supporting the all of these cars by all those mechanics has been essentially handled by the marketplace. That could never have happened if the market for cars generally accepted them as untouchable black boxes.
Are you sure? After all this is your second definition of "freedom".
Yes.
Actually the main problem with RMS and his followers is not they want to use the GPL, but rather their spin machine where they try to promote the GPL by labeling everything else as non-free and evil.
My experience is limited to asia where music and video streaming at the cafes is pretty common and most of the people in the cafes don't have jobs with internet access or PCs at home.
The obvious answer is to distribute videos and other bandwidth-heavy content through a peer-to-peer mechanism such as Bittorrent. Then the users themselves take care of providing your extra server capacity. I guess it just needs a Bittorrent client written in Flash (ugh), or else built into the browser, with the site's main server acting as the first seed for each file.
That's unlikely to work, at least in anything like bittorrent's current form, because these users don't own their own computers and network connections. Based on my experiences in a couple of 3rd world countries, I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of these users are at internet cafes - they spend the local equivalent of a couple of quarters for a couple hours and then the next user gets on. Few torrents of any significant size are going to complete in that short of a space of time.
It depends on whether Windows 7 can pass-through USB devices and PCI cards to Windows XP. Otherwise, people will try and fail to use hardware with XP drivers on the virtual XP. (Windows 7 uses Vista drivers.)
Probably will on new hardware. USB can already be done - Suns Virtualbox does it and I think vmware does too. People are working on i/o virtualization for PCs, so you can expect that virtualized PCI will probably be feasible on new PCs in a year or two.
Considering that La Guardia, JFK and Newark are all very near manhattan and all have runaways that point out over manhattan it seems quite reasonable to believe that over the last 40 years of commercial 747 flights that there have been many thousands of them which have had either approaches or takeoffs that went over the island.
I think the citation needed is that there no and have never been any flight paths like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because the war on some drugs is bought and paid for doesn't mean that laws and policies which escalate the war on some drugs don't get implemented. In fact, that seems to be the way it normally goes, just look at how much more violent the drug trade has become in the last few years, mexico is really getting fucked over by it.
If anti-drug drones become a standard part of the "war on drugs" - the US military is going to pay the price.
The drug lords make tens of billions of dollars each year. If drones start to significantly hurt their business, they will invest in the development of anti-drone technology. Once invented, it can't be un-invented and it isn't like its going to be stamped top-secret and kept in a scif either - it will spread to anyone who thinks they need to protect themselves from drones.
So, can I get burn-in on my LCD monitor now?
His point is that you have no evidence to back up your assertions regarding his character or motives.
Right, because people write "dear mods" to give moderators a special education intended only for them because they are such special people with educational needs distinct from everybody else on slashdot, not because they'll mod him down out of their own ignorance unlike non-moderators who can't act on their own ignorance.
I wonder if you are aware of the "I'm superior to you" undercurrent behind that.
Lol! Now I understand why you put that disclaimer on there. You have an inferiority complex and getting downmodded just feeds it.
Funny mods don't count towards karma.
So sometimes people give other moderations instead.
I would never do that myself - see my other post about making your joke and taking the moderations like a man.
Dunno what TSG is.
My point was simply what I wrote - the original intent was not necessarily to promote mindless hate, but that hasn't stopped thousands of people from doing just that with them.
Dear mods, that's meant to be facetious. Some of you seem to be a little trigger-happy so you won't understand why I shouldn't have to explain that.
Make your joke and take the moderations like a man.
If you are going to explain that it is a joke, you might as well not bother in the first place since explaining takes away all the fun.
They're not used to fuel hate, they're used to familiarize soldiers with the appearance of specific human beings so that they don't pass by unnoticed. Kind of like "wanted" posters, but made in a way that they're likely to be looked at more often.
Which is probably true of the original decks distributed to US soldiers in Iraq. But is definitely not true of the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands more decks sold on ebay and hundreds of websites to those who have zero chance of encountering the people depicted on the cards.
And while you are at it, keep those kids away from Grimm's fairy tales.
The work could be put in the public domain, but only the author would have the right to package and sell that work.
Which still has all the culture-killing features with respect to derivative works as the current system.
The only approach that addresses all of the modern problems with copyright is to charge for creation instead of distribution.
That is the point... sure if you only use GPL stuff internally it is technically true nobody can force your code out of you. The second you want to try your hand selling said internal application, you got screwed. Thus people are leery of using GPL code because it takes away those kinds of options.
Puh-lease. MUST we do this same old song and dance again?
Nobody can "force your code out of you" - at worst all that happens is that you are not licensed to distribute binaries and unless the GPL code owner has actually registered the copyright - which is highly unlikely for anything other than very high profile projects - your entire liability is limited to the income derived from the unlicensed distribution.
There is nothing stopping a shop from developing a program in house with GPL pieces and then replacing those pieces with something else if they don't want to provide source if they want to market it. Which is so uncommon anyway that as a percentage of in-house software, such cases are surely down in the hudredths of a percent range anyway.
Sounds like she was a naive girl.
http://www.youswear.com/index.asp?language=Lithuanian
It's human hair because, being at the top of the food chain, all those nasty chemicals like herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers collect in our bodies in the highest concentrations. Thus our hair is chock-full-o-chemicals. It's no wonder human hair mats have all these wondrous properties -- they are really just recycling all those chemicals we've been putting into the environment for the last 50 years.
That's actually not true. There's no obligation in the GPL for your competitor to give you any of their source code
Its really an extremely minor semantic point. He could have just as easily said, "your competitor can not prevent you from getting access to the source for their enhanced product." The crux of the matter is that anyone who modifies GPL software and attempts to distribute it does not maintain control over the source code to their modifications.
In either situation, I think peoples reactions of "zomg 9/11 part 2!!2@1!" were perfectly rational, but if you have an alternate hypothesis, I'm open to hearing it.
Rational? No. Human? Yes. See the availability heuristic.
I can't speak for the asian countries since I've never been there, but according to http://www.internetworldstats.com/asia/th.htm, the situation in countries like Thailand is way better than what you describe (I didn't take the time to check the other countries).
You'll find poor people with really bad jobs, that's true, but it's not the norm as most of the foreigners seem to think.
That link does not define what constitutes an "internet user" - but speaking about people I know with average jobs like school teachers, call center employees and accountants, they can't afford home computers with anything more than dial-up. If you look at the income numbers listed at that site - ~$210/month average for Thailand, ~$120/month average for philippines where DSL is at $15-$20/month - that's not affordable.
Philippines, thailand, cambodia, malaysia and indonesia.
Federico, a guy from Colombia (LA) with a standard 3Mb connection who doesn't work in a sweatshop making Nike shoes.
I'm willing to bet that for every 1 of you there are at least 99 more who aren't so lucky. In worse off places, I'm good with an estimate that's closer to 1 out of a thousand.
There is a reason you don't get it, and the fault is all your own.
Next time I will try to be more verbose.
No need, just don't use biased phraseology.
Let's examine what he claims: closed-source software is evil.
You are going to have to do a hell of a lot better than just use the word "evil." That's more biased phraseology designed to vastly oversimply his argument, making it essentially a strawman.
You think that logistics is the real problem. As has already been said, open source is necessary but not sufficient. Logistics is just another hurdle. But you will never get to the point where logistics can be dealt with without first insisting on open source.
For example, there are probably roughly just as many mechanics as there are software developers and yet, because the overwhelmingly vast majority of car buyers would not consider purchasing a car with the engine compartment welded shut the logistical issue of supporting the all of these cars by all those mechanics has been essentially handled by the marketplace. That could never have happened if the market for cars generally accepted them as untouchable black boxes.
Are you sure? After all this is your second definition of "freedom".
Yes.
Actually the main problem with RMS and his followers is not they want to use the GPL, but rather their spin machine where they try to promote the GPL by labeling everything else as non-free and evil.
So, now the pot is calling the kettle black, eh?
My experience is limited to asia where music and video streaming at the cafes is pretty common and most of the people in the cafes don't have jobs with internet access or PCs at home.
The obvious answer is to distribute videos and other bandwidth-heavy content through a peer-to-peer mechanism such as Bittorrent. Then the users themselves take care of providing your extra server capacity. I guess it just needs a Bittorrent client written in Flash (ugh), or else built into the browser, with the site's main server acting as the first seed for each file.
That's unlikely to work, at least in anything like bittorrent's current form, because these users don't own their own computers and network connections. Based on my experiences in a couple of 3rd world countries, I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of these users are at internet cafes - they spend the local equivalent of a couple of quarters for a couple hours and then the next user gets on. Few torrents of any significant size are going to complete in that short of a space of time.
It depends on whether Windows 7 can pass-through USB devices and PCI cards to Windows XP. Otherwise, people will try and fail to use hardware with XP drivers on the virtual XP. (Windows 7 uses Vista drivers.)
Probably will on new hardware. USB can already be done - Suns Virtualbox does it and I think vmware does too. People are working on i/o virtualization for PCs, so you can expect that virtualized PCI will probably be feasible on new PCs in a year or two.
Considering that La Guardia, JFK and Newark are all very near manhattan and all have runaways that point out over manhattan it seems quite reasonable to believe that over the last 40 years of commercial 747 flights that there have been many thousands of them which have had either approaches or takeoffs that went over the island.
I think the citation needed is that there no and have never been any flight paths like that.