Agreed. Life better? Let's see, with Florida, much of California, Michigan, and many East Coast states, including much or all of New York City completely under water...let's just say it won't be a picnic...if you thought Katrina was bad, as BTO would say... you ain't see n-n-n-nothin' yet. And, speaking of Katrina, some scientists studying global warming believe that it is responsible for the more-active-than-usual hurricane seasons of the past few years. Which makes sense since the main cause of hurricanes is -- wait for it -- heat. Who paid these shills?
It's not the first time Shuttleworth has taken a stance like this. Beryl is turned off by default in Feisty because it's not very stable. Wine is not and has never been installed by default for any version of Ubuntu. (Besides, if you use Wine, you really need to get the latest snapshots because what's included in the main distro is too old)
Some tech is cool, but if it can't be used by most people easily, it shouldn't be installed -- and in some cases shouldn't be included on the CDs -- by default, especially when your stated goal is provide an easy-to-use desktop OS for the masses.
You might want to consider that this was actually proposed by one of their shareholders
Yeah. A small pension fund with a very few shares. They hardly represent the majority.
That's a nice answer to all those "if a company forgoes profit for doing good, it's a crime against capitalism and shareholders" comments I regularly see on slashdot.
Hmph. I usually see the opposite, but...
However, this isn't really "doing evil" but rather "not committing do doing good". Google is still free to implement these measures, they are just not forced to do it. From a management perspective, it leaves more options on the table.
But Google won't implement these measures and we all know that. The bottom line is that China is too big a market for Google to ignore. Everyone has to remember that Google is nobody's hero. That's not the reason they exist -- they exist to make money. They reward creativity at Google because ultimately it's profitable to do so. They try to make themselves look less evil than other big companies (AOL, Microsoft, etc.) because they it's profitable to do so. I'm not saying that Google didn't start with admirable goals, but today they are a publicly-traded company and their raison d'etre is to create value for their shareholders. So everyone needs to stop putting companies -- particular Apple and Google -- on a pedestal and realize that your relationship with them as a consumer should be if you like their products, use them, if not, go elsewhere.
'Responsible disclosure' is a euphemism for 'we can't fix bugs fast enough, so if you keep the vulnerabilities a secret, it'll help us to save face.' And more time often means months, not days. Responsible disclosure is nothing more than security through obscurity. And security through obscurity is as good as no security at all. In the intervening months, you have a live, exploitable hole sitting there ripe for attack! And not just on that one system -- every like-configured system is vulnerable. I say, damn the consequences. Report as soon as possible no matter who it embarrasses. It'll either put more pressure on them to fix the bugs faster, or push users to more secure platforms, where security fixes don't take months and are usually found before their ever exploited in the wild.
My bad. On that particular point (but not on the others), I was confusing our group's own bylaws with IRS 501(c)(3) requirements. 501(c)(3) requirements do limit the activities that an organization can be purposed for -- including promotion of religion or benefiting science or eduction or benefiting the homeless or poor, etc. IOW, the groups major activities must be included in what's listed in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Yeah, I'm not really sure how they can get tax-exempt status, given they're running the thing as a business.
As a former treasurer of a 501(c)(3) religious organization, I can tell you that it's not illegal for a tax-exempt organization to charge money for things. It's done all the time. Ever buy Girl Scout Cookies?
In fact, non-profits are expected to run as a business -- they are required to use GAAP methods for accounting and everything.
Non-profits are only prohibited from, among a few other things, participating in politics -- doing things like backing or opposing particular political candidates or parties for office, from backing or opposing particular pieces of legislation, etc. Also, they're required to donate a certain percentage of their income to charity. There's nothing wrong with making money -- it's just that whatever is brought in has to go either to administration cost, towards the organization's stated purposes in line with its bylaws, or towards a charity that is in line with the organizations goals and purposes.
How very insightful of you. Why should there be a problem with it? If I say I'm working to defeat the Neo-Nazi movement, it would seem no one would care but the Neo-Nazis and most folks would cheer me on. It wouldn't seem likely a judge would have me arrested, either. But as soon as I say I'm working to bring down Scientology, I'm 'threatening a religion'? As long as I work within the confines of the law, I should have the right to say what I want against any institution. That's why the Framers wrote the 1st Amendment -- because bad institutions should be openly criticized.
There are credit monitoring services that will watch your credit files for you for a monthly fee. In addition, you can get one credit report for free from each of the 3 major credit bureaus by going to http://www.annualcreditreport.com.
In many states, consumers who want to remove the freeze can use a special identification number to unlock access to their credit file.
Yeah, that's a good idea... So how many ID-Ten-T consumers are going to carry this number around -- in their wallets/purses or leave them unsecured in a filing cabinet? When will legislators get a clue that most people are complete ignorant about the security of almost anything?
In my experience it's exactly the opposite. There's no *strategy* here, because Linux introduction in the enterprise is driven by technicians. The mixed platform emerged espontaneously.
Not at a lot of companies. For example, at Ford Motor Co., Linux adoption was initially started by technicians for a small number of things like routers, but through IT management became an official company strategy. Now most servers at Ford are either Linux or AIX or are moving to Linux or AIX.
What people have to realize is that Microsoft is not a company with one cohesive strategy anymore. They fight battles on a number of different fronts... it's spreading the company thin and people are scratching their heads wondering why Vista was late or why it didn't deliver on promises.
The bottom-line as to why the deal with Novell is simple: Microsoft may have a monopoly on the desktop, but in the server space it has nothing even close. There are very few Microsoft-only shops these days; most enterprise customers don't want to put all their eggs in one basket and very wisely so. So they adopt a mixed-platform strategy and CIOs rightly realize that the only thing causing any problems in interop between Linux and Windows is Microsoft, so they make demands. Novell wants a piece of the action because it believes that doing so will differentiate SuSE from Red Hat and put/keep them on top of the enterprise Linux market.
And unless you have a monopoly in a particular space -- the customer is king.
If the other projects deserve to survive, because they add substantial value, then they will continue to exist. Otherwise not.
Or if they solve different problems. For example, OpenMoko may be better for OEMs manufacturing embedded or mobile devices, while Ubuntu will probably be better for aftermarket installs, since Ubuntu will likely be much easier for the end-user to install and upgrade.
1) Don't be afraid to approach people in a friendly manner. You don't need fancy pick-up lines. Seriously.
2) Commit (e.g. sit down with them instead of hovering over) and get committment out of them (tell their own stories, jokes, buy you stuff in return for you buying them stuff).
3) Don't be afraid to reveal attraction.
1) But you do need to appear confident. Confidence is attractive to both sexes, so this applies whoever you are.
2) Learn how to make idle conversation. Find people who you have something in common with. Join a book club, a hobby group, go to a convention, anywhere there are many people of the appropriate sex that have something in common with you. It makes it easy to start a conversation when you already know that you and the person you'd like to meet have similar interests.
3) Yes, but don't over-do it or be annoying about it either.
-- a geek happily-married for two years.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. Life better? Let's see, with Florida, much of California, Michigan, and many East Coast states, including much or all of New York City completely under water...let's just say it won't be a picnic...if you thought Katrina was bad, as BTO would say ... you ain't see n-n-n-nothin' yet. And, speaking of Katrina, some scientists studying global warming believe that it is responsible for the more-active-than-usual hurricane seasons of the past few years. Which makes sense since the main cause of hurricanes is -- wait for it -- heat. Who paid these shills?
.
. / \ .
We could all
just start typing
all our messages
just like this!
Nah, that might
be too annoying...
It's not the first time Shuttleworth has taken a stance like this. Beryl is turned off by default in Feisty because it's not very stable. Wine is not and has never been installed by default for any version of Ubuntu. (Besides, if you use Wine, you really need to get the latest snapshots because what's included in the main distro is too old)
Some tech is cool, but if it can't be used by most people easily, it shouldn't be installed -- and in some cases shouldn't be included on the CDs -- by default, especially when your stated goal is provide an easy-to-use desktop OS for the masses.
I'm aware of what they do and that what they do is bad. But running a non-profit like a business isn't one of those things.
Yeah. A small pension fund with a very few shares. They hardly represent the majority.
Hmph. I usually see the opposite, but
But Google won't implement these measures and we all know that. The bottom line is that China is too big a market for Google to ignore. Everyone has to remember that Google is nobody's hero. That's not the reason they exist -- they exist to make money. They reward creativity at Google because ultimately it's profitable to do so. They try to make themselves look less evil than other big companies (AOL, Microsoft, etc.) because they it's profitable to do so. I'm not saying that Google didn't start with admirable goals, but today they are a publicly-traded company and their raison d'etre is to create value for their shareholders. So everyone needs to stop putting companies -- particular Apple and Google -- on a pedestal and realize that your relationship with them as a consumer should be if you like their products, use them, if not, go elsewhere.
Ssshhh! Don't give away all my secrets!
'Responsible disclosure' is a euphemism for 'we can't fix bugs fast enough, so if you keep the vulnerabilities a secret, it'll help us to save face.' And more time often means months, not days. Responsible disclosure is nothing more than security through obscurity. And security through obscurity is as good as no security at all. In the intervening months, you have a live, exploitable hole sitting there ripe for attack! And not just on that one system -- every like-configured system is vulnerable. I say, damn the consequences. Report as soon as possible no matter who it embarrasses. It'll either put more pressure on them to fix the bugs faster, or push users to more secure platforms, where security fixes don't take months and are usually found before their ever exploited in the wild.
My bad. On that particular point (but not on the others), I was confusing our group's own bylaws with IRS 501(c)(3) requirements. 501(c)(3) requirements do limit the activities that an organization can be purposed for -- including promotion of religion or benefiting science or eduction or benefiting the homeless or poor, etc. IOW, the groups major activities must be included in what's listed in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Because they can compete with open source drivers. Otherwise, why would Microsoft fear Red Hat and Novell?
As a former treasurer of a 501(c)(3) religious organization, I can tell you that it's not illegal for a tax-exempt organization to charge money for things. It's done all the time. Ever buy Girl Scout Cookies?
In fact, non-profits are expected to run as a business -- they are required to use GAAP methods for accounting and everything.
Non-profits are only prohibited from, among a few other things, participating in politics -- doing things like backing or opposing particular political candidates or parties for office, from backing or opposing particular pieces of legislation, etc. Also, they're required to donate a certain percentage of their income to charity. There's nothing wrong with making money -- it's just that whatever is brought in has to go either to administration cost, towards the organization's stated purposes in line with its bylaws, or towards a charity that is in line with the organizations goals and purposes.
Mod parent up!
How very insightful of you. Why should there be a problem with it? If I say I'm working to defeat the Neo-Nazi movement, it would seem no one would care but the Neo-Nazis and most folks would cheer me on. It wouldn't seem likely a judge would have me arrested, either. But as soon as I say I'm working to bring down Scientology, I'm 'threatening a religion'? As long as I work within the confines of the law, I should have the right to say what I want against any institution. That's why the Framers wrote the 1st Amendment -- because bad institutions should be openly criticized.
I know I'd go back in time prevent that movie from ever being made!
Start with the story of John Connor and his wife, of course, set in the future.
Ick! I hope nobody ever murders Steve Ballmer. (Did I just say that?!)
And another. Man! One of Slashdot's first stories ... announcing Linux kernel 2.1.79 ... those were the days!
Don't worry, comrade. Communists like you are safe.
Exactly whose financial interests would this new law be in?
Now you know why.
There are credit monitoring services that will watch your credit files for you for a monthly fee. In addition, you can get one credit report for free from each of the 3 major credit bureaus by going to http://www.annualcreditreport.com.
Yeah, that's a good idea... So how many ID-Ten-T consumers are going to carry this number around -- in their wallets/purses or leave them unsecured in a filing cabinet? When will legislators get a clue that most people are complete ignorant about the security of almost anything?
Not at a lot of companies. For example, at Ford Motor Co., Linux adoption was initially started by technicians for a small number of things like routers, but through IT management became an official company strategy. Now most servers at Ford are either Linux or AIX or are moving to Linux or AIX.
Interesting! Mod parent up!
... it's spreading the company thin and people are scratching their heads wondering why Vista was late or why it didn't deliver on promises.
What people have to realize is that Microsoft is not a company with one cohesive strategy anymore. They fight battles on a number of different fronts
The bottom-line as to why the deal with Novell is simple: Microsoft may have a monopoly on the desktop, but in the server space it has nothing even close. There are very few Microsoft-only shops these days; most enterprise customers don't want to put all their eggs in one basket and very wisely so. So they adopt a mixed-platform strategy and CIOs rightly realize that the only thing causing any problems in interop between Linux and Windows is Microsoft, so they make demands. Novell wants a piece of the action because it believes that doing so will differentiate SuSE from Red Hat and put/keep them on top of the enterprise Linux market.
And unless you have a monopoly in a particular space -- the customer is king.
Or if they solve different problems. For example, OpenMoko may be better for OEMs manufacturing embedded or mobile devices, while Ubuntu will probably be better for aftermarket installs, since Ubuntu will likely be much easier for the end-user to install and upgrade.
Hmmm..that's funny. The cat looked alive to me.