The tags on the summary say it best 'useanundergrad'
There are somethings that really just work best when you have an assistant or partner working with you. It's like sports, well most of them, you need a team to get the job done right.
Actually, I'd rather they be made to pick up a piece of litter for every spam email they sent, or some other such public service that equates piece for piece to the amount of spam they have sent.
Repaint a house for someone = 100 spam messages Clean up a city block of litter = 100 spam messages
Well you get the point. Force them to wear bright yellow spandex jumpsuits with the spam logo on it until they have fully atoned.
Whatever the punishment, it should be public, and only mildly degrading.
Something that lets us all remember what they did, and what it costs in reparations.
I also have that wait and see attitude. I'm reading all the news and comparing notes with what RonPaul might have done. I was somewhat disappointed to see the strong attraction to Israel that Obama displayed almost immediately after being elected. That doesn't bode well for change IMO.
Yes, there is that whole play along to get along, but with a strong grass roots movement behind him, he is not entirely forced to play along. Simply outing people to the public for not getting on the Obama game plan should cause issues. Now THAT would be change. The kind I'm hoping to see. REAL shit stirring. I'm not holding my breath.
These are early days, but now is when he needs to be getting things moving so that on inauguration day he hits the ground running. He already has influence because he is president elect. While he may not have veto, he will. It's very possible for him to begin shaking and moving in Washington. The thought that since he's the new kid on the playground he will be hindered is foolish.
Oh, and on topic, CTO vs CIO. He should have both. One is Technology, the other is Information. Both are important, linked, and necessary, but the domains overlap only for a small portion of each.
I may be a sexist pig, but you are not an English major. Men are born with the qualifications for being a gigolo and women are born with the qualifications for being whores, both taken in the common meanings.
In context, complaints were that women prostitutes were victimized, thus pointing the context of prostitute in the discussion to the female variant.
That said, you are right despite the lack of a market for male prostitutes as far as I can tell. Hard to get paid for it when so many others would give the product away for free. Of course that is an entirely different 'sexist' discussion:-)
An interesting point. I believe that the valid reason for doing so is to help ensure that medical screenings are done and reported as would be necessary for a safety level acceptable to the public good.
Even now, anyone can sell it... until they are caught. The improvement is not having to worry about being caught, nor spreading diseases... say, like AIDS. Taxation happens to all businesses, or is supposed to. This business should be no different in that respect. Licenses help with that sort of thing, though if you can figure out a way to make it work effectively without the license, I'm willing to entertain the idea.
Oh, absofuckinglutely (I just got reported) I enjoy this. As my work week winds down on Friday afternoon, I read this thread to help me hold back the tears of sorrow I feel as I realize I won't be able to work for the next two whole days! Without disagree mail, I don't think I could make it through these tough and trying fucking times. (Damn, just got reported... again, and again... fuck... again!!)
Well, yes, you can help me. I was just wondering if you can explain the differences between the Value-add Anti-Rootkit Pro module and the Value-add Anti-Rootkit Amateur module.
You see, my wife doesn't think I should be messing with anything for professionals, so I need to know the differences.
On the sex and marriage part? Tell me what woman has not used sex to gain some advantage? Yeah, Mother Theresa doesn't count! I know a guy who makes a good deal of money, has a mistress, and a deal with his wife: sex and a hummer once a week, and she can have all the money she needs for her kids. That's true, not made up. I think you are probably naive if you believe marriage is sacred, and nothing bad happens in marriages. The divorce rate in the US is what? 50+ percent? Yep, that speaks volumes for how great marriage is.
For those who read the other post, no, I'm not bitter much. I just have a realistic view of the world. How many of the guys here in relationships haven't been offered an easy time in bed then asked for some gift or permission to spend money? say on a new car, or something for the house? That's legal prostitution in anyone's view, and because it is within the marriage, it's ok.
Yes, it comes down to what IS love, and when is sex not part of love. Everyone has to judge for themselves when it's just sex, or when it's truly love. The truth is that everyone is at some point going to trade sex for merchandise, money, or favors. Sorry folks, that is how the human species is. Altruism is great, in theory, but rather tainted in practice.
No, I'm not saying that ALL humans will do this. I'm just saying it's a trend with a very long history.
Your argument is invalid on several levels. I will probably offend some people here, but will try not to while still speaking frankly:
Women are born with the qualifications for prostitution. If they choose to be prostitutes in a safe clean environment, it is victimless. What you are talking about is a crime that has little to do with prostitution, in the same way that rape has little to do with sex. Sex just seems to be the hinging factor in both.
Slavery is what you are talking about, and that is wrong. Whether they are used as prostitute slaves, or kitchen slaves, it's wrong. So lets get that straight right now. Enslavement is wrong; prostitution is not.
What you describe are victims of slavery, not prostitution. Not all prostitution establishments are run off the backs of slaves. Just visit some legal brothels in the USA, or Europe etc. Your claims are used to validate making a victimless business into a criminal enterprise. You in essence force morality of your choosing on other people and THAT is wrong. The happy prostitute is not a myth, there just are not as many of them as there should be because people like you want to ruin their lives to suit your own sense of morality. That's sick!
Because of your self-serving morality and unwillingness to actually help people who are enslaved in any real manner, YOU are the one that is helping to enslave them by creating and perpetuating the situation that enslaved them in the first place. So take your pious reasonings, and walk on down to the jail, pick out one or two prostitutes and get them back on their feet... go on, lets see you hold up your part of the argument.
An excellent point! If it were legal and safe? Uh, why wouldn't people go to prostitutes? I did say 'aid' in decreasing or eliminating...... not wipe it out in one swift move.
The other argument fails. Studies (no links to hand) have shown that legalization of victimless crimes (typically drugs) did not lead to higher drug use, or back alley dealing of drugs in spite of legal paths. Once there is a legal market, it sorts itself out. As for frosty saying people won't do it as much... ahem! When did sex ever get unpopular? In the history of the fucking world? Jebus, it's still popular in the Vatican FFS.
frosty simply offers arguments that the government as always offered. They have not fixed the problem, or made life any better for either the prostitutes or the johns. You'd think the legislators in Washington DC would be all for this? They seem to be regular customers. Well, some just hang out in bathrooms.
Even in dire times of financial crisis alcohol, sex, drugs, and gambling are top earners for those that deal in those businesses. Prohibition does NOT work, and only strengthens the bottom feeders who take advantage of people. And yes, sometimes those bottom feeders are the government!
Pardon the pun, but morally speaking, there is more than one section of society which is in a bad place. If prostitutes had a legal standing their position would be a much better one. Lets not forget that the prostitutes you seem to be thinking about did not have the advantage of working for Heidi Fliess. Sex for trade or sale is as common as muck, most of it is simply covered by a marriage license. Argue all you wish with that, but it is true. It's only when partners change and money changes hands that anyone gets upset. Oddly, the people who get upset are those that would not be in the business anyway.
Most victimization of prostitutes is a direct result of the legality of their situation. If you could report your pimp for not paying you the agreed amount without going to jail, many problems would solve themselves regarding victimization. It is sad to see, but the LAW victimizes them as much as anything else.
somehow, your post made me think of someone trying to patent the vagina... interesting thought, and I'm sure patent examiners might be for it... still, I don't get the relationship here.
What is wrong with the whole damned thing is this: prostitution is illegal, even though there are no victims for this crime, and I don't care what you think about how there is illegal activity all through the sex industry, it would not be nearly as prevalent if it were a legal business for which folk could lose their license if they were doing bad things.
Because it remains illegal, this sort of problem will plague online sites and newspapers etc. You can't get rid of it, can't keep it in a special section, can't clean it up. All those problems would be easy to deal with if it was licensed and legal.
This is just one of the places that government could tax and regulate to ensure a better public health, a safer society, and aid in decreasing or eliminating personal income tax.
Regulating morality does NOT work. Legislating a prohibition never has worked, especially on things that are victimless crimes.
Yes, I've been thinking that since I posted. Just have to figure out a few things I think. Will try to put time into it this weekend. Hopefully before then someone will chime in and say "Oh, just go to ubuntu.somesite.net and donate." I'll have to research more before putting hands-on effort into it.
I see that you are using the wireless microphone to demonstrate a couple of possible problems. I don't think that you've thought it through completely yet.
What happens when the mic is turned on/up. It will have to scan. If there is a WiFi link, it will have to move to the next channel and try again. Eventually, like the WiFi devices, it will find a channel and stay there. When WiFi devices are turned on, they will do the same. It's not nearly as bad as you think it's going to be. This type of link establishment is common on every TCP/IP network.
Because the devices are smart, the users don't have to be. Frequency hopping devices have the ability to limit any damage due to packet loss. That is the nature of the technology. It is designed to deal with such issues.
Typically, Tx and Rx are on separate channels, so the transmitter from a WiFi system will NOT desensitize the Mic's front end. This type of arrangement has been in use for decades to protect reception.
Now, if you truly think that this is so difficult and it's going to be fucked up, I would advise you to avoid any job in the radio-communications industry. You are not close to understanding how such things work.
Guess what? I spent less time on those upgrades than I'd have spent on upgrading them to Win XP. I mention it because time was all it cost me. I did 3 of them concurrently while drinking beer and watching past episodes from Comedy Central. It's not like I lost that time somehow, not more than a few minutes anyway.
You're just trying to find a way to make Linux sound like NOT free software. Do you really make > $100/hr at home?
I could have, and will, set up a repository here at home, so all machines get the same code, and I download it only once. ooohhh boo hoo, that will cost more time. I often feel sorry for people whose only complaint is about time. You spend time no matter what software/OS you upgrade to. How much is up to you. If you read, I had zero problems on 8 upgrades. I'm doing the fresh install test on an old AMD 1.2GH machine today, so far, I've spent about... ughhhh 5 minutes on the install. I don't expect to have to spend more than 10 minutes more.
So, go on, tell everyone how wasteful of your time installing Linux is. Buying a car takes time. No matter what car you buy, unless you're willing to listen to just anyone tell you that a new Pontiac is the car everyone buys that wants a user friendly car. Good luck with your Pontiac.
Yes, I know what you're saying also, but let me quote rs79, a/. oldtimer:
Brian K. Reid. Everybody else is either too corrupt or too bizarre to actually do the job. Brian understands people, unlike most geek geniuses.
Now, limiting the controlling input to such a function for the ENTIRE COUNTRY to one person is fraught with problems as illustrated by the quote above. Even one President is backed up by House, Senate, and SCOTUS. See, if it's important, there should be some checks and balances. Just the mere mention of M$ on this site is cause for a flamewar. How would a single CTO personage be able to deal with all the crap/politics/bribery/governmental interference and all that will come their way? Even the DoJ was not free from corruption. One person, without a jury behind them, will fall prey to special interests. It seems inevitable. The idea is right, perhaps even the execution of that idea will be, but I have doubts about a single person as head of that implementation.
This thread points out the problem of anointing one person as CTO. Hate to say it but this is one of those things that might do better with a board, not a leader. That is to say that while there may be a judge, it's the jury that counts. Using one man is not enough, even the SCOTUS has nine. When it's important enough to do something, it's important enough to do it right. RMS should probably be on the jury, along with other notable technology evangelists.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that 8 upgrades cost me nothing but time. One thing that I wish Canonical would do is to set up a donation fund where I could donate say $50 per install and know that all the apps that come with Ubuntu would get a reasonably fair share of that money. Is anyone at Canonical listening?
AS it is now, I have to donate separately to those projects which I feel that I use enough to donate to. Trouble is that some projects which I do use are not readily recognizable as such. The Samba project is one such case. Ubuntu and others more-or-less hide its use from the user so they would be unaware that they are using it. I think this would go a long way toward helping various projects. Even if all Samba got from my $50 was $0.75. That is still a donation. In my case it would be eight times that. Yes, I do contribute to F/OSS projects, EFF, and several other groups who have my best interests at heart... well, our interests coincide.
Another thing that Canonical could do, short of setting up such a fund, is write a small app that lists the apps being used on any installation and allow the user to save the list to disk which would include the designated donation web page for that project. That's not quite as good as a donation fund, but would still help the smaller projects by announcing their use and value.
I like a good value as much as the next guy, and there is something satisfying about paying a very fair price for someone's work when it is valuable to yourself. I just wish it was easier to do.
It's a lengthy read, and there isn't much in there to say that Ubuntu has any real work to do. Seems like they were comparing two Ferrari race cars and commenting on the differences in interiors... to use a car analogy.
I've just upgraded 8 systems to 8.10 and am quite happy. I was concerned over real world issues about the upgrade from early reports. The old IBM T22 with 256MB RAM was my test case. Guess what? The upgrade went as fast as my Wireless G card would allow it, after a reboot, and then an update last night, it is working a bit better than with 8.04 from a layman's point of view. Yes, it can drag now and then, but is resource limited severely. After the upgrade I did not have to tweak anything, and any problems I was having prior are now fixed. I appear to have fscked up a setting on the wireless networking, but now it's all good. As far as I am concerned, with two older laptops upgraded, and 3 older desktops upgraded, all with ZERO defects, Ubuntu continues to impress me. I will continue to give out CDs free to anyone that wants to improve their computing life.
Now, if you just have to have the 'perfect' gaming machine... go ahead and worry about little things. As for the rest of the world, 8.10 is rocking awesomeness.
Who cares particularly if it is legal or not. What you SHOULD be worrying about is how easy would it be for such a company to take a handsome bribe to allow others to hijack your connection via their firmware/router?
Slashdot Mirror
The tags on the summary say it best 'useanundergrad'
There are somethings that really just work best when you have an assistant or partner working with you. It's like sports, well most of them, you need a team to get the job done right.
Actually, I'd rather they be made to pick up a piece of litter for every spam email they sent, or some other such public service that equates piece for piece to the amount of spam they have sent.
Repaint a house for someone = 100 spam messages
Clean up a city block of litter = 100 spam messages
Well you get the point. Force them to wear bright yellow spandex jumpsuits with the spam logo on it until they have fully atoned.
Whatever the punishment, it should be public, and only mildly degrading.
Something that lets us all remember what they did, and what it costs in reparations.
I also have that wait and see attitude. I'm reading all the news and comparing notes with what RonPaul might have done. I was somewhat disappointed to see the strong attraction to Israel that Obama displayed almost immediately after being elected. That doesn't bode well for change IMO.
Yes, there is that whole play along to get along, but with a strong grass roots movement behind him, he is not entirely forced to play along. Simply outing people to the public for not getting on the Obama game plan should cause issues. Now THAT would be change. The kind I'm hoping to see. REAL shit stirring. I'm not holding my breath.
These are early days, but now is when he needs to be getting things moving so that on inauguration day he hits the ground running. He already has influence because he is president elect. While he may not have veto, he will. It's very possible for him to begin shaking and moving in Washington. The thought that since he's the new kid on the playground he will be hindered is foolish.
Oh, and on topic, CTO vs CIO. He should have both. One is Technology, the other is Information. Both are important, linked, and necessary, but the domains overlap only for a small portion of each.
I may be a sexist pig, but you are not an English major. Men are born with the qualifications for being a gigolo and women are born with the qualifications for being whores, both taken in the common meanings.
In context, complaints were that women prostitutes were victimized, thus pointing the context of prostitute in the discussion to the female variant.
That said, you are right despite the lack of a market for male prostitutes as far as I can tell. Hard to get paid for it when so many others would give the product away for free. Of course that is an entirely different 'sexist' discussion :-)
An interesting point. I believe that the valid reason for doing so is to help ensure that medical screenings are done and reported as would be necessary for a safety level acceptable to the public good.
Even now, anyone can sell it... until they are caught. The improvement is not having to worry about being caught, nor spreading diseases... say, like AIDS. Taxation happens to all businesses, or is supposed to. This business should be no different in that respect. Licenses help with that sort of thing, though if you can figure out a way to make it work effectively without the license, I'm willing to entertain the idea.
I agree with JJNess... awesome!
Oh, absofuckinglutely (I just got reported) I enjoy this. As my work week winds down on Friday afternoon, I read this thread to help me hold back the tears of sorrow I feel as I realize I won't be able to work for the next two whole days! Without disagree mail, I don't think I could make it through these tough and trying fucking times. (Damn, just got reported... again, and again... fuck... again!!)
Pardon me young man. You do work here, don't you?
Well, yes, you can help me. I was just wondering if you can explain the differences between the Value-add Anti-Rootkit Pro module and the Value-add Anti-Rootkit Amateur module.
You see, my wife doesn't think I should be messing with anything for professionals, so I need to know the differences.
On the sex and marriage part? Tell me what woman has not used sex to gain some advantage? Yeah, Mother Theresa doesn't count! I know a guy who makes a good deal of money, has a mistress, and a deal with his wife: sex and a hummer once a week, and she can have all the money she needs for her kids. That's true, not made up. I think you are probably naive if you believe marriage is sacred, and nothing bad happens in marriages. The divorce rate in the US is what? 50+ percent? Yep, that speaks volumes for how great marriage is.
For those who read the other post, no, I'm not bitter much. I just have a realistic view of the world. How many of the guys here in relationships haven't been offered an easy time in bed then asked for some gift or permission to spend money? say on a new car, or something for the house? That's legal prostitution in anyone's view, and because it is within the marriage, it's ok.
Yes, it comes down to what IS love, and when is sex not part of love. Everyone has to judge for themselves when it's just sex, or when it's truly love. The truth is that everyone is at some point going to trade sex for merchandise, money, or favors. Sorry folks, that is how the human species is. Altruism is great, in theory, but rather tainted in practice.
No, I'm not saying that ALL humans will do this. I'm just saying it's a trend with a very long history.
Your argument is invalid on several levels. I will probably offend some people here, but will try not to while still speaking frankly:
Women are born with the qualifications for prostitution. If they choose to be prostitutes in a safe clean environment, it is victimless. What you are talking about is a crime that has little to do with prostitution, in the same way that rape has little to do with sex. Sex just seems to be the hinging factor in both.
Slavery is what you are talking about, and that is wrong. Whether they are used as prostitute slaves, or kitchen slaves, it's wrong. So lets get that straight right now. Enslavement is wrong; prostitution is not.
What you describe are victims of slavery, not prostitution. Not all prostitution establishments are run off the backs of slaves. Just visit some legal brothels in the USA, or Europe etc. Your claims are used to validate making a victimless business into a criminal enterprise. You in essence force morality of your choosing on other people and THAT is wrong. The happy prostitute is not a myth, there just are not as many of them as there should be because people like you want to ruin their lives to suit your own sense of morality. That's sick!
Because of your self-serving morality and unwillingness to actually help people who are enslaved in any real manner, YOU are the one that is helping to enslave them by creating and perpetuating the situation that enslaved them in the first place. So take your pious reasonings, and walk on down to the jail, pick out one or two prostitutes and get them back on their feet... go on, lets see you hold up your part of the argument.
An excellent point! If it were legal and safe? Uh, why wouldn't people go to prostitutes? I did say 'aid' in decreasing or eliminating...... not wipe it out in one swift move.
The other argument fails. Studies (no links to hand) have shown that legalization of victimless crimes (typically drugs) did not lead to higher drug use, or back alley dealing of drugs in spite of legal paths. Once there is a legal market, it sorts itself out. As for frosty saying people won't do it as much... ahem! When did sex ever get unpopular? In the history of the fucking world? Jebus, it's still popular in the Vatican FFS.
frosty simply offers arguments that the government as always offered. They have not fixed the problem, or made life any better for either the prostitutes or the johns. You'd think the legislators in Washington DC would be all for this? They seem to be regular customers. Well, some just hang out in bathrooms.
Even in dire times of financial crisis alcohol, sex, drugs, and gambling are top earners for those that deal in those businesses. Prohibition does NOT work, and only strengthens the bottom feeders who take advantage of people. And yes, sometimes those bottom feeders are the government!
Pardon the pun, but morally speaking, there is more than one section of society which is in a bad place. If prostitutes had a legal standing their position would be a much better one. Lets not forget that the prostitutes you seem to be thinking about did not have the advantage of working for Heidi Fliess. Sex for trade or sale is as common as muck, most of it is simply covered by a marriage license. Argue all you wish with that, but it is true. It's only when partners change and money changes hands that anyone gets upset. Oddly, the people who get upset are those that would not be in the business anyway.
Most victimization of prostitutes is a direct result of the legality of their situation. If you could report your pimp for not paying you the agreed amount without going to jail, many problems would solve themselves regarding victimization. It is sad to see, but the LAW victimizes them as much as anything else.
somehow, your post made me think of someone trying to patent the vagina... interesting thought, and I'm sure patent examiners might be for it... still, I don't get the relationship here.
What is wrong with the whole damned thing is this: prostitution is illegal, even though there are no victims for this crime, and I don't care what you think about how there is illegal activity all through the sex industry, it would not be nearly as prevalent if it were a legal business for which folk could lose their license if they were doing bad things.
Because it remains illegal, this sort of problem will plague online sites and newspapers etc. You can't get rid of it, can't keep it in a special section, can't clean it up. All those problems would be easy to deal with if it was licensed and legal.
This is just one of the places that government could tax and regulate to ensure a better public health, a safer society, and aid in decreasing or eliminating personal income tax.
Regulating morality does NOT work. Legislating a prohibition never has worked, especially on things that are victimless crimes.
Yes, I've been thinking that since I posted. Just have to figure out a few things I think. Will try to put time into it this weekend. Hopefully before then someone will chime in and say "Oh, just go to ubuntu.somesite.net and donate." I'll have to research more before putting hands-on effort into it.
I see that you are using the wireless microphone to demonstrate a couple of possible problems. I don't think that you've thought it through completely yet.
What happens when the mic is turned on/up. It will have to scan. If there is a WiFi link, it will have to move to the next channel and try again. Eventually, like the WiFi devices, it will find a channel and stay there. When WiFi devices are turned on, they will do the same. It's not nearly as bad as you think it's going to be. This type of link establishment is common on every TCP/IP network.
Because the devices are smart, the users don't have to be. Frequency hopping devices have the ability to limit any damage due to packet loss. That is the nature of the technology. It is designed to deal with such issues.
Typically, Tx and Rx are on separate channels, so the transmitter from a WiFi system will NOT desensitize the Mic's front end. This type of arrangement has been in use for decades to protect reception.
Now, if you truly think that this is so difficult and it's going to be fucked up, I would advise you to avoid any job in the radio-communications industry. You are not close to understanding how such things work.
Done! thanks
Guess what? I spent less time on those upgrades than I'd have spent on upgrading them to Win XP. I mention it because time was all it cost me. I did 3 of them concurrently while drinking beer and watching past episodes from Comedy Central. It's not like I lost that time somehow, not more than a few minutes anyway.
You're just trying to find a way to make Linux sound like NOT free software. Do you really make > $100/hr at home?
I could have, and will, set up a repository here at home, so all machines get the same code, and I download it only once. ooohhh boo hoo, that will cost more time. I often feel sorry for people whose only complaint is about time. You spend time no matter what software/OS you upgrade to. How much is up to you. If you read, I had zero problems on 8 upgrades. I'm doing the fresh install test on an old AMD 1.2GH machine today, so far, I've spent about... ughhhh 5 minutes on the install. I don't expect to have to spend more than 10 minutes more.
So, go on, tell everyone how wasteful of your time installing Linux is. Buying a car takes time. No matter what car you buy, unless you're willing to listen to just anyone tell you that a new Pontiac is the car everyone buys that wants a user friendly car. Good luck with your Pontiac.
Yes, I know what you're saying also, but let me quote rs79, a /. oldtimer:
Brian K. Reid. Everybody else is either too corrupt or too bizarre to actually do the job. Brian understands people, unlike most geek geniuses.
Now, limiting the controlling input to such a function for the ENTIRE COUNTRY to one person is fraught with problems as illustrated by the quote above. Even one President is backed up by House, Senate, and SCOTUS. See, if it's important, there should be some checks and balances. Just the mere mention of M$ on this site is cause for a flamewar. How would a single CTO personage be able to deal with all the crap/politics/bribery/governmental interference and all that will come their way? Even the DoJ was not free from corruption. One person, without a jury behind them, will fall prey to special interests. It seems inevitable. The idea is right, perhaps even the execution of that idea will be, but I have doubts about a single person as head of that implementation.
Awesome. Duh (slaps forehead) Google is my friend. Should have Googled before posting that. Thanks for the reminder :)
This thread points out the problem of anointing one person as CTO. Hate to say it but this is one of those things that might do better with a board, not a leader. That is to say that while there may be a judge, it's the jury that counts. Using one man is not enough, even the SCOTUS has nine. When it's important enough to do something, it's important enough to do it right. RMS should probably be on the jury, along with other notable technology evangelists.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that 8 upgrades cost me nothing but time. One thing that I wish Canonical would do is to set up a donation fund where I could donate say $50 per install and know that all the apps that come with Ubuntu would get a reasonably fair share of that money. Is anyone at Canonical listening?
AS it is now, I have to donate separately to those projects which I feel that I use enough to donate to. Trouble is that some projects which I do use are not readily recognizable as such. The Samba project is one such case. Ubuntu and others more-or-less hide its use from the user so they would be unaware that they are using it. I think this would go a long way toward helping various projects. Even if all Samba got from my $50 was $0.75. That is still a donation. In my case it would be eight times that. Yes, I do contribute to F/OSS projects, EFF, and several other groups who have my best interests at heart... well, our interests coincide.
Another thing that Canonical could do, short of setting up such a fund, is write a small app that lists the apps being used on any installation and allow the user to save the list to disk which would include the designated donation web page for that project. That's not quite as good as a donation fund, but would still help the smaller projects by announcing their use and value.
I like a good value as much as the next guy, and there is something satisfying about paying a very fair price for someone's work when it is valuable to yourself. I just wish it was easier to do.
It's a lengthy read, and there isn't much in there to say that Ubuntu has any real work to do. Seems like they were comparing two Ferrari race cars and commenting on the differences in interiors... to use a car analogy.
I've just upgraded 8 systems to 8.10 and am quite happy. I was concerned over real world issues about the upgrade from early reports. The old IBM T22 with 256MB RAM was my test case. Guess what? The upgrade went as fast as my Wireless G card would allow it, after a reboot, and then an update last night, it is working a bit better than with 8.04 from a layman's point of view. Yes, it can drag now and then, but is resource limited severely. After the upgrade I did not have to tweak anything, and any problems I was having prior are now fixed. I appear to have fscked up a setting on the wireless networking, but now it's all good. As far as I am concerned, with two older laptops upgraded, and 3 older desktops upgraded, all with ZERO defects, Ubuntu continues to impress me. I will continue to give out CDs free to anyone that wants to improve their computing life.
Now, if you just have to have the 'perfect' gaming machine... go ahead and worry about little things. As for the rest of the world, 8.10 is rocking awesomeness.
What was that slogan? "Plays for sure" It's a long way from that to begging hardware manufacturers to play along nicely.
Yes, I know they are not related... just seemed appropriate to mention it here having read what has been said already.
Who cares particularly if it is legal or not. What you SHOULD be worrying about is how easy would it be for such a company to take a handsome bribe to allow others to hijack your connection via their firmware/router?
Vyatta anyone? http://www.vyatta.com/
I think it's about time for some serious F/OSS hardware and firmware to replace what was once thought safe and sound from hacking and such.