I really was hoping to stay out of this discussion, since it's clear from your earlier posts that you are certain that your arrogant opinions cannot be false and you refuse to listen to anybody who says otherwise. Anyway, your last comment really pushed me over the edge. So I'll take the bait and respond, but my conscience does not allow me to remain silent in the face of such wrong-headed nonsense.
Without using those atomic bombs, it's not clear that you wouldn't be speaking Japanese right now - and certainly without the Internet to spread your stupidity. And I note that European countries are the only countries to detonate nuclear weapons without ever facing an enemy that justified their use.
First of all, India and Pakistan have conducted nuclear detonations. Now I'm not sure how much your knowledge of foreign parts deviates from the US average, but India and Pakistan are not European countries. And you can't say that the tensions between India and Pakistan "justify" these nuclear tests. No enemy could possibly justify the development of nuclear weapons.
Secondly, the US is the only country to have detonated nuclear weapons while facing an enemy that did not justify their use. This is an almost universally accepted fact. I can't believe that you would attempt to use one of the most disgraceful events in US history in an attempt to prove yourself superior.
I think some other comment that I read earlier sums it up best. Your world-view is truly embarrasing. You ought to be utterly ashamed of youself.
Well said! I can't believe the number of posts I've seen here accusing the BBC of towing the Government line or speaking New Labour speak. Do they even watch the BBC? And of course we all remember that episode a few years back with Greg Dyke.
Good for you! I've seen the enemy too. On TV, making speeches about this 'war on terror'. In fact I hear there's a whole bunch of them enemies going to that G8 conference. That ought to be fun. Oh wait... you mean that wasn't the enemy you were talking about? Well then I'm sorry to say it, but you haven't seen the enemy.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that Microsoft does not intent to support CSS2, ever. Apparently they regard the standard as flawed. Kinda makes you wonder what Microsoft is thinking. I mean, they're called standards for a reason. To ignore them because you don't agree with them is silly at best, and sheer wrong at worst.
Yes, I was quite disappointed when I read that. I truly am surprised how little people understand about science in general, and relativity in particular. Then again, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised any more. What is it with people attributing blatantly false information to famous people. Is it human nature or something, to make themselves look knowledgeable? Doesn't really work, does it. Einstein was very open to the possibility that FTL speeds could be attained. As the parent said, it would be tricky since it requires using non-Einsteinian space, but it is still possible. Einstein said so, so there.
I never did understand why companies are so against other uses.
Because, for XBoxes at least, it's not profitable, due to Microsoft's crazy business plan. If you buy an XBox (sold at a loss) and then start to hack around with it, chances are you're not then going to buy a dozen games (which are profitable) to go with it.
Yes, it's been said many times, both here and elsewhere, but US government agencies are getting uesd to having these 'anti-terrorist' powers, and they seem perfectly happy to apply them to situations where they really shouldn't be applied.
So first you criticise one person for something, then you criticise someone else for not answering a question that was not directed at them in the first place?
> Answer the question!
No! Your question is meaningless in the context of this discussion.
> Do you evade answering all questions, or just the ones where you don't have a satisfactory answer?
Only the ones where you don't have a satisfactory question.
Am I the only one that realises the oxymoron here? "Liberal Fascists"? It's a contradiction in terms. The two are mutually exclusive. Fascist, by definition, implies authoritarianism, which is the polar opposite of liberalism. I think it's quite sad these days that nobody bothers to really think about what the words they use actually mean.
It may not have solved the confusion, but at least it brought the computing industry back into line with the rest of the world. Standards are there for a reason. They should be adhered to.
" Copyright is meant to protect the rights of the author.
Not true. Copyright was meant to reward the author for contributing something worthwhile to society, by allowing them to reap the profits from the work for a limited period. The problem arises when big businesses want to be able to reap the rewards permanently, gaining a profit far larger than the work they put in, while simultaneously denying many people something very useful.
Better yet, take all those backups of the code you wrote (assuming you still have them lying around somewhere) and put them up on a website somewhere as a demonstration of the great stuff that you wrote. After all, it is GPLed, right? So our Stalinist MUD-owning dictator should have no problems with it.
No, I think the point is that we can't steal from them because they define that we do not at any point actually own the software. He has a point. I personally disagree with it entirely, but it is certainly something to consider.
Depends how you define deception. Like when every newly started company and their dog wants a.com domain. And how many of these are transnational companies? Practically none. That is a deception, whether people realise it or not.
I still do use them. One of the major reasons that ICANN introduced their.biz TLD was to put these people out of business, and I think that is morally and ethically reprehensible.
I think what it means is that the briefcase requires anyone who wants to open it to give their fingerprint, the idea being that these fingerprints are then stored by an unknown person, for an unknown length of time, and for an unknown purpose. It's kinda similar to the whole deal with having fingerprints on an ID card. Why the hell does the government need my fingerprint? They don't. So why does it have to go on the ID card? Because govenments would ideally like the power to treat all people like criminals.
Yeah it is insane, but it's just the latest in a long line of insanity. Notice how a lot of the technologies that are being touted recently are all about restricting what people can do with content. It's a growing trend, and I don't think it's right.
Slashdot Mirror
So it's a dirty kludge, but if it works...
I think this is a highly fascinating insight into what makes narwhals interesting. Kudos to the scientists who made the discovery.
I think you just did.
I really was hoping to stay out of this discussion, since it's clear from your earlier posts that you are certain that your arrogant opinions cannot be false and you refuse to listen to anybody who says otherwise. Anyway, your last comment really pushed me over the edge. So I'll take the bait and respond, but my conscience does not allow me to remain silent in the face of such wrong-headed nonsense.
First of all, India and Pakistan have conducted nuclear detonations. Now I'm not sure how much your knowledge of foreign parts deviates from the US average, but India and Pakistan are not European countries. And you can't say that the tensions between India and Pakistan "justify" these nuclear tests. No enemy could possibly justify the development of nuclear weapons.
Secondly, the US is the only country to have detonated nuclear weapons while facing an enemy that did not justify their use. This is an almost universally accepted fact. I can't believe that you would attempt to use one of the most disgraceful events in US history in an attempt to prove yourself superior.
I think some other comment that I read earlier sums it up best. Your world-view is truly embarrasing. You ought to be utterly ashamed of youself.
Another nail in the coffin for Intel.
Very true. Trouble is, one side doesn't have any evidence. And the other side is the defence...
Well said! I can't believe the number of posts I've seen here accusing the BBC of towing the Government line or speaking New Labour speak. Do they even watch the BBC? And of course we all remember that episode a few years back with Greg Dyke.
Good for you! I've seen the enemy too. On TV, making speeches about this 'war on terror'. In fact I hear there's a whole bunch of them enemies going to that G8 conference. That ought to be fun. Oh wait... you mean that wasn't the enemy you were talking about? Well then I'm sorry to say it, but you haven't seen the enemy.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that Microsoft does not intent to support CSS2, ever. Apparently they regard the standard as flawed. Kinda makes you wonder what Microsoft is thinking. I mean, they're called standards for a reason. To ignore them because you don't agree with them is silly at best, and sheer wrong at worst.
Yes, I was quite disappointed when I read that. I truly am surprised how little people understand about science in general, and relativity in particular. Then again, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised any more. What is it with people attributing blatantly false information to famous people. Is it human nature or something, to make themselves look knowledgeable? Doesn't really work, does it. Einstein was very open to the possibility that FTL speeds could be attained. As the parent said, it would be tricky since it requires using non-Einsteinian space, but it is still possible. Einstein said so, so there.
Because, for XBoxes at least, it's not profitable, due to Microsoft's crazy business plan. If you buy an XBox (sold at a loss) and then start to hack around with it, chances are you're not then going to buy a dozen games (which are profitable) to go with it.
Yes, it's been said many times, both here and elsewhere, but US government agencies are getting uesd to having these 'anti-terrorist' powers, and they seem perfectly happy to apply them to situations where they really shouldn't be applied.
> Answer the question!
No! Your question is meaningless in the context of this discussion.
> Do you evade answering all questions, or just the ones where you don't have a satisfactory answer?
Only the ones where you don't have a satisfactory question.
Am I the only one that realises the oxymoron here? "Liberal Fascists"? It's a contradiction in terms. The two are mutually exclusive. Fascist, by definition, implies authoritarianism, which is the polar opposite of liberalism. I think it's quite sad these days that nobody bothers to really think about what the words they use actually mean.
It may not have solved the confusion, but at least it brought the computing industry back into line with the rest of the world. Standards are there for a reason. They should be adhered to.
Are they Not Work Safe? :o
I do so love the new goatse.
Better yet, take all those backups of the code you wrote (assuming you still have them lying around somewhere) and put them up on a website somewhere as a demonstration of the great stuff that you wrote. After all, it is GPLed, right? So our Stalinist MUD-owning dictator should have no problems with it.
No, I think the point is that we can't steal from them because they define that we do not at any point actually own the software. He has a point. I personally disagree with it entirely, but it is certainly something to consider.
Well, I have to say it's relieving to see that stupidity isn't exclusive to Windows users.
.gov, .mil? How many non-US entities do you know under those TLDs? Now that's violating the spirit of the Internet.
Depends how you define deception. Like when every newly started company and their dog wants a .com domain. And how many of these are transnational companies? Practically none. That is a deception, whether people realise it or not.
I still do use them. One of the major reasons that ICANN introduced their .biz TLD was to put these people out of business, and I think that is morally and ethically reprehensible.
I think what it means is that the briefcase requires anyone who wants to open it to give their fingerprint, the idea being that these fingerprints are then stored by an unknown person, for an unknown length of time, and for an unknown purpose. It's kinda similar to the whole deal with having fingerprints on an ID card. Why the hell does the government need my fingerprint? They don't. So why does it have to go on the ID card? Because govenments would ideally like the power to treat all people like criminals.
Yeah it is insane, but it's just the latest in a long line of insanity. Notice how a lot of the technologies that are being touted recently are all about restricting what people can do with content. It's a growing trend, and I don't think it's right.