They're not "suing anyone they don't like", they're defending copyrighted material or protecting trademarks- and they are famous for doing so, since long before Jobs was re-hired. Shockingly they HAVE to, or said copyright/trademarks are diluted.
That is 50% right. In other words, it's wrong.
Trademarks can become diluted and lose their value, at which point the law no longer protects them from infringement. Copyright isn't like that at all, never has been.
Remember, the "unemployment" figure refers to new jobless claims or something equally useless. Perhaps that almost goes without saying: of course more than 5% of us don't work, I guess that is common sense.
At which point, he stares right at the audience and says "I have nothing but contempt for these people". Look at his face when he says it. He's playing it for laughs, but he's deadly serious.
You're reading way too much into "his face". That's his shtick, he always says his jokes with a straight face (and succeeds most of the time). I wouldn't read too much into it (like he really really means it this time).
Since the whole design of his nightly show is based on contempt for the political press, what you've quoted is not much of a stretch.
I doubt anyone who's ordered men to their deaths in combat is happy to have those decisions mocked.
I'm pretty sure Bush lost the right to get all outraged about Iraq jokes with the "look under the table for WMDs" joke routine at this same dinner a year or two ago.
I'm sure the decision to invade Iraq wasn't an easy one.
I'm sure it was hard work. It must have been hard. The work, that is. Hard work, and he knows it is hard.
In the long run, I think you'll find that Bush turns out much like Reagan. Unpopular during his time in office, but in retrospect he'll be viewed as a good president who actually made a positive difference in the Middle East.
That would help his position in history an awful lot, yes. Although at this stage I'd be happy if the Middle East doesn't become a slag heap.
I got the feeling that this is de rigeur for this kind of event, simply that we're paying more attentino because it's featured on Slashdot, BoingBoing, and wherever the hell else.
So, how accurate is that perception?
It's really hard to say. I've only seen bits and pieces but they're sometimes awfully vicious to the president at these. Usually over less important stuff, which might be the heart of it.
My impression is that it was a combination of Colbert striking home so well, Bush and the press corps not liking to laugh THAT MUCH at themselves about their many failings, and underneath it all the fact that the failings Colbert was joking about have cost a lot of people their lives.
If he'd been a little more cunning he might have found a way to skewer Bush first and leave the press for last. He'd have gotten more laughs from the press corps audience that way, maybe, but it wouldn't have suited the Colbert persona. So this ended up being a performance for people who weren't there in person to enjoy it.
Apple somehow manages to make the best personal computer hardware, and personal computer OS software, and the best consumer electronics device on the market
BAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
Re:Driving force for bloodless surgery
on
Bloodless Surgery
·
· Score: 1
Acts 15:29:
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.
So ye shall do well by skipping a needed blood transfusion?!?!!? That's brilliant. A really insightful and useful interpretation of God's word, making it really relevant to today's society.
Corporations have every right in the United States of America to attempt to sue people for things they say.
Crikey. The statutes under which they might have any sort of basis for suing you are required to be consistent with, that's right you guessed it, the FIRST AMENDMENT. That's the way our government works.
Basically, what's Lucent thinking, and why doesn't MAD work here?
A MAD analogy to patents isn't very good. MAD involves two parties that are held to a desireable state of inaction by a mutual threat of annihilation, with all the other players in the game on the margins.
The patent situation isn't like that at all. Losing a patent lawsuit isn't always going to have an annihilation-like effect, though it can be expensive. The smaller players aren't on the margins - they're meaningful players.
Then MS came... well, all I can say is go look for games that have the Bungie Studio's logo somewhere on the game now...
You could say a lot more. The games Bungie is making are still extremely good. The problem isn't that quality has diminished, it has not. It's that the have become Xbox-oriented.
Our company would be more inclined to donate if we knew that the money we gave would go directly to support OpenSSH. We have no interest in supporting OpenBSD. Fork OpenSSH into it's own project with separate financing and management, and we'll send you some money.
Right. That would be really meaningful, what with OpenBSD and OpenSSH being the same people and all.
Someone would probably give OpenBSD a grant, but Theo has already proven he doesn't know when to shut up and has problems playing with others.
A careful reader of the interviews that come up with Theo occasionally will note that he's pretty good about endorsing the companies who actually support the project. Just in that short interview he mentioned a couple of wifi chipmakers who actually share information. The expectation is that the open-source concerned reader will support those companies in favor of the ones which are mentioned who do not share information.
Past experience suggests that the average Linux kiddie is more likely to take the binary driver and run, particularly if there's game playing to be done. But it seems Theo's doing a reasonable job of supporting the supportive vendors.
A while back -- pre-SCO -- OpenBSD did a "license audit". I don't have the list in front of me but a sizable number of reasonably well-known open source projects had questionable licences. Theo really did ask nicely and got most of them changed.
TCP Wrappers IIRC was one of them, pppd another (again IIRC)
I'm pretty sure Wietse Venema saw the value in updating the licenses for TCP wrappers and (perhaps more importantly) Postfix when approached by Theo and did so without any drama whatsoever. Of course, when there's no drama it doesn't make front page geek news...
It seems rather unbecoming of a pillar of the open source community like OpenBSD to undermine the "the marketplace of ideas created by copylefted code means we can give our product away and still support ourselves" message of open source by floating this "WE CAN'T JUST GIVE OUR PRODUCT AWAY AND STILL SUPPORT OURSELVES!! YOU, GIVE ME MONEY!!" message on top of it.
Then I suppose it's a good thing Theo isn't saying anything like that.
The reason why Linux has any support at all is because
...back in the day, when they still had the money to do it, VA Linux and SGI paid them to do the grunt work of a port. It's been in maintenance mode ever since.
To me, that's unacceptable. It's classic bait-and-switch.
Yes, those OpenBSD guys are the typical evil marketing geniuses, just sucking you in with one thing and then trying to sell you something else. Damn them and their not-for-profit, giving all their software away, could use some donations please to continue their work ways.
I'm sure if you run out of money and cant work on openssh anymore that someone with the time and resources will pick up the ball and run with it. Such is the nature of OSS.
Wow. That sounds a lot like holding companies and vulture capitalists. I thought we were all trying to get away from that horseshit.
Slashdot Mirror
That is 50% right. In other words, it's wrong.
Trademarks can become diluted and lose their value, at which point the law no longer protects them from infringement. Copyright isn't like that at all, never has been.
Remember, the "unemployment" figure refers to new jobless claims or something equally useless. Perhaps that almost goes without saying: of course more than 5% of us don't work, I guess that is common sense.
Since the whole design of his nightly show is based on contempt for the political press, what you've quoted is not much of a stretch.
I'm pretty sure Bush lost the right to get all outraged about Iraq jokes with the "look under the table for WMDs" joke routine at this same dinner a year or two ago.
I'm sure it was hard work. It must have been hard. The work, that is. Hard work, and he knows it is hard.
That would help his position in history an awful lot, yes. Although at this stage I'd be happy if the Middle East doesn't become a slag heap.
It's really hard to say. I've only seen bits and pieces but they're sometimes awfully vicious to the president at these. Usually over less important stuff, which might be the heart of it.
My impression is that it was a combination of Colbert striking home so well, Bush and the press corps not liking to laugh THAT MUCH at themselves about their many failings, and underneath it all the fact that the failings Colbert was joking about have cost a lot of people their lives.
If he'd been a little more cunning he might have found a way to skewer Bush first and leave the press for last. He'd have gotten more laughs from the press corps audience that way, maybe, but it wouldn't have suited the Colbert persona. So this ended up being a performance for people who weren't there in person to enjoy it.
BAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
So ye shall do well by skipping a needed blood transfusion?!?!!? That's brilliant. A really insightful and useful interpretation of God's word, making it really relevant to today's society.
That would have to exclude the ones who read him and the ones who talk to him.
That's silly. There needs to be a legal basis for a lawsuit or it will be immediately dismissed.
Crikey. The statutes under which they might have any sort of basis for suing you are required to be consistent with, that's right you guessed it, the FIRST AMENDMENT. That's the way our government works.
A MAD analogy to patents isn't very good. MAD involves two parties that are held to a desireable state of inaction by a mutual threat of annihilation, with all the other players in the game on the margins.
The patent situation isn't like that at all. Losing a patent lawsuit isn't always going to have an annihilation-like effect, though it can be expensive. The smaller players aren't on the margins - they're meaningful players.
You could say a lot more. The games Bungie is making are still extremely good. The problem isn't that quality has diminished, it has not. It's that the have become Xbox-oriented.
That's ignorant. It was never anything close to worthless.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=MSFT&t=my
Appalled at the obvious lie?
Right. That would be really meaningful, what with OpenBSD and OpenSSH being the same people and all.
A careful reader of the interviews that come up with Theo occasionally will note that he's pretty good about endorsing the companies who actually support the project. Just in that short interview he mentioned a couple of wifi chipmakers who actually share information. The expectation is that the open-source concerned reader will support those companies in favor of the ones which are mentioned who do not share information.
Past experience suggests that the average Linux kiddie is more likely to take the binary driver and run, particularly if there's game playing to be done. But it seems Theo's doing a reasonable job of supporting the supportive vendors.
I'm pretty sure Wietse Venema saw the value in updating the licenses for TCP wrappers and (perhaps more importantly) Postfix when approached by Theo and did so without any drama whatsoever. Of course, when there's no drama it doesn't make front page geek news...
One of the dumber things I've read this week.
Now that is a bit more interesting.
Then I suppose it's a good thing Theo isn't saying anything like that.
Ooooh, good point. What is OpenSSH compared to Netbeans?
No, actually it doesn't.
Your credit report is not "public knowledge".
Yes, those OpenBSD guys are the typical evil marketing geniuses, just sucking you in with one thing and then trying to sell you something else. Damn them and their not-for-profit, giving all their software away, could use some donations please to continue their work ways.
Oh the nerve!
Wow. That sounds a lot like holding companies and vulture capitalists. I thought we were all trying to get away from that horseshit.