This issue and the online-porn one represent -- in my opinion -- the best hope for network neutrality. When the ISPs begin peering into the network's packets, for the purpose of charging Google and friends a little extra, the possibility arises that they could be held liable for copyright infringement or obscenity in those packets. Since it looks like we're going to lose the NN fight, I think we should look at this angle
I've always wondered what would happen if you saved yourself the money for attorneys' fees etc. by just showing up in court and telling your side of the story in 100% not-fancy language.
Say you're the JMRI guy, being sued for patent infringement. If you were allowed to speak in plain English, the case would last 5 minutes and cost nothing:
"Your honor, you can see that my software was released before their patent was even filed..."
"Hmm, that seems about right. KAM is pretty-much owned and should pay $100,000 in punitive damages.
I know; the team of lawyers buries you under a mountain of papers, discovery motions, etc. Why can't you say:
"Your honor, they're burying me in discovery motions, etc. to intimidate me into settling. Please make them
Yeah, see. I'm not saying you're wrong, just nonresponsive. This 15-page account of CIA abuses has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You're just talking about what you want to talk about. Do your friends consider you a good listener?
Okay, it's probably me, but almost every distro I've tried out in the past year has been able to configure GRUB with itself and my XP partition but *screws *up other Linux OSes I have. FC5 made it so I couldn't boot Gentoo without using the grub CLI. Now Kubuntu has done the same to FC5.
Sorry to hijack your thread; it just seemed odd that Lx plays nicer with windows than with other Lxes...
Wow, you clearly have a couple dozen axes to grind. For what it's worth, I liked Manufacturing Consent quite a bit, and in fact I probably agree with a good deal of what you say. But your style of discussion is impossible; you recite a litany of crimes perpetrated by a cast of rightwing villains in lieu of straightforward talking about what is happening. So I gotta let you roll.
Meh. Fox is evil, etc. but I'm looking for subtler and more complex causes. This country used to have ideals, and used to attract the most brilliant minds from all over the world who values those ideals. Now it seems like "Only one thing counts in this world: get them to sign on the line which is dotted!" (love Glengarry). In fairness, FOX found an unserved market (right-leaning media-haters) and is probably just trying to cash in on them. Other big media sensationalize and simplify everything, in order to cash in. People don't watch the shows (and the ads) unless they hear the soundbytes they're used to, that reinforce their present opinions. Journalism used to be a moral enterprise -- a critical thinking enterprise. Likewise government used to be a problem-solving enterprise, not an endless re-election campaign. Alas.
"you can be guaranteed they'd rather have those jobs than not. Your beef should be with their governments for not re-investing their taxes into infrastructure and education and improving the lot of the normal people."
I got into this once with a libertarian by making the casual and -- I thought -- obvious remark that sweatshops are bad. The response, like yours, was that starving to death is worse.
I think it's a false dichotomy: why are the only choices employment-by-Nike and unemployment? Companies that have a longterm view of profit know that the most-productive option is to invest in the growth of the local economy. Microcredits, for example, that allow locals to start up their own independent businesses. These dollars generate more dollars that stay local -- the profit is not skimmed off and shipped to Phil. Pretty straightforward. Also very very, capitalistic.
Wow, a whole flame war over your sig. I loved it because I *personally *know self-professed libertarians who do exactly what you're talking about. They answer all questions through the principle "who owns what in this situation" rather than "who is allowed to do what?". I don't know about all economics being a sham, and I think invoking Goebbels is a little much, but then again invoking slavery is almost as bad and sheds some light:
Isn't the question of slavery just a question of property rights in one view. Who owns the slaves? Can't they do what they want with their property? Makes the libertarian/propertarian divide pretty clear.
Who owns this or that band of electromagnetic spectrum? Or this source code? Can't they do what they want with their property? The problem is obviously the uncritical acceptance of the word "property" for anything that is treated-as-owned, in law, by convention, rather than in accordance with its nature. Can spectrum be "owned"? Can ideas? Propertarians generally don't like to contemplate the nature of things; they just call everything a commodity and are done with it.
He's done this before, but I jotted it down then and the number was different. I wonder if this is a habit, and/or if these numbers have expiration dates. Maybe that wasn't his mobile.
Thanks for replying to a sincere post that was for some reason modded flamebait.
I cite as the "cause" of our general cultural slide a rampant cynicism, an essentially amoral theory that states that anything one wants to do to "get ahead" (esp. in business) is acceptable. The "cause" of this cynicism is another question...
If you read TFA, you see that Gavin's talking about developing open-source software applications as a business, not using said software. It's too complicated to sell software targeting Linux et. al. because there are so many version. I read his thesis statement as:
Since open source software is not a monoculture, it'll be difficult for an ISV to crush all competition and establish decades-long monopoly rents
This is a "drawback" that I, needless to say, can live with.
In short, the first post on this article pretty much could've been the last.
'submitting a form without reloading the page! Any easy way to do that?'
I must've misunderstood the question but can't you just do an image submit button with onClick=sendFormStufftoPHPScriptThatDoesWhatever() using the xmlhttpreq object?
Title pretty much sums up the topic. Just seems like America hasn't done anything exciting in the last decade, unless you count beating your chest about how exciting all the stuff you're doing is.
from TFA : "Why ship Vista to enterprises with volume license agreements before shipping it to consumers? Businesses are not going to install Vista anyway. Why waste the effort?"
Answer: this is a way of sorta-meeting the (latest) promised release date. Saving face, as it were. So that the fact that you're full of hot vaporware isn't as obvious.
There's another def at work in a lot of the FUD. For TFA's author, Matt Harley "desktop user" means "user who got locked into a bunch of Microsoft or windows-based closed-source applications, often despite warnings about the potential for lock-in if heshe chose that stuff."
Now they're ready to check out Linux, and they're pist b/c there are only 17 email/calendar apps available. There should be 18! And the 18th has to be Outlook!
Now, it's not polite for the Lx crowd to just go "told you so" -- but the fact that this user is locked in is not a flaw in Linux. And when they open up the conversation in that way, they're going to get snide responses.
I think he got wrapped up in buzzwords at some point, and can't get out. Evolution is not his PIM (Personal Information Manager) of choice. Outlook is.
My PIM of choice blows both of those away: it's my #$%^ing brain. Evolution is an email client. And a calendar I don't use. (In point of fact I use thunderbird).
On a side-note, just 'cause I don't feel like finding another place to post:
"by the time said software does finally make its way down to the Linux user, the Windows crowd has been using it for nearly a year or longer."
Funniest line ever. I wasn't aware that Windows users have had beagle-esque integrated search, 3D desktops, genuine multi-user permission security, built-in firewall, etc. for years. What's that movie where Keanu and Sandra live in different times? Or Meg Ryan and Hugh Jackman do the same thing? Are windows users living in Jan 2008 now?
I thought about that last bit a little more and realized there are plenty of situations where simple read-access could be dangerous... well, I use PEAR::DB anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder whether AOL could be enjoined from collecting any personal data about users until this case is decided?
This issue and the online-porn one represent -- in my opinion -- the best hope for network neutrality. When the ISPs begin peering into the network's packets, for the purpose of charging Google and friends a little extra, the possibility arises that they could be held liable for copyright infringement or obscenity in those packets. Since it looks like we're going to lose the NN fight, I think we should look at this angle
I've always wondered what would happen if you saved yourself the money for attorneys' fees etc. by just showing up in court and telling your side of the story in 100% not-fancy language.
Say you're the JMRI guy, being sued for patent infringement. If you were allowed to speak in plain English, the case would last 5 minutes and cost nothing:
"Your honor, you can see that my software was released before their patent was even filed...""Hmm, that seems about right. KAM is pretty-much owned and should pay $100,000 in punitive damages.
I know; the team of lawyers buries you under a mountain of papers, discovery motions, etc. Why can't you say:
"Your honor, they're burying me in discovery motions, etc. to intimidate me into settling. Please make them
stop."And so on. Just wondering.
I put the alternative (microcredit programs) into my post. Please work on your reading comprehension
Yeah, see. I'm not saying you're wrong, just nonresponsive. This 15-page account of CIA abuses has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You're just talking about what you want to talk about. Do your friends consider you a good listener?
Okay, it's probably me, but almost every distro I've tried out in the past year has been able to configure GRUB with itself and my XP partition but *screws *up other Linux OSes I have. FC5 made it so I couldn't boot Gentoo without using the grub CLI. Now Kubuntu has done the same to FC5.
Sorry to hijack your thread; it just seemed odd that Lx plays nicer with windows than with other Lxes...
Wow, you clearly have a couple dozen axes to grind. For what it's worth, I liked Manufacturing Consent quite a bit, and in fact I probably agree with a good deal of what you say. But your style of discussion is impossible; you recite a litany of crimes perpetrated by a cast of rightwing villains in lieu of straightforward talking about what is happening. So I gotta let you roll.
Meh. Fox is evil, etc. but I'm looking for subtler and more complex causes. This country used to have ideals, and used to attract the most brilliant minds from all over the world who values those ideals. Now it seems like "Only one thing counts in this world: get them to sign on the line which is dotted!" (love Glengarry). In fairness, FOX found an unserved market (right-leaning media-haters) and is probably just trying to cash in on them. Other big media sensationalize and simplify everything, in order to cash in. People don't watch the shows (and the ads) unless they hear the soundbytes they're used to, that reinforce their present opinions. Journalism used to be a moral enterprise -- a critical thinking enterprise. Likewise government used to be a problem-solving enterprise, not an endless re-election campaign. Alas.
"you can be guaranteed they'd rather have those jobs than not. Your beef should be with their governments for not re-investing their taxes into infrastructure and education and improving the lot of the normal people."
I got into this once with a libertarian by making the casual and -- I thought -- obvious remark that sweatshops are bad. The response, like yours, was that starving to death is worse.
I think it's a false dichotomy: why are the only choices employment-by-Nike and unemployment? Companies that have a longterm view of profit know that the most-productive option is to invest in the growth of the local economy. Microcredits, for example, that allow locals to start up their own independent businesses. These dollars generate more dollars that stay local -- the profit is not skimmed off and shipped to Phil. Pretty straightforward. Also very very, capitalistic.
Wow, a whole flame war over your sig. I loved it because I *personally *know self-professed libertarians who do exactly what you're talking about. They answer all questions through the principle "who owns what in this situation" rather than "who is allowed to do what?". I don't know about all economics being a sham, and I think invoking Goebbels is a little much, but then again invoking slavery is almost as bad and sheds some light:
Isn't the question of slavery just a question of property rights in one view. Who owns the slaves? Can't they do what they want with their property? Makes the libertarian/propertarian divide pretty clear.
Who owns this or that band of electromagnetic spectrum? Or this source code? Can't they do what they want with their property? The problem is obviously the uncritical acceptance of the word "property" for anything that is treated-as-owned, in law, by convention, rather than in accordance with its nature. Can spectrum be "owned"? Can ideas? Propertarians generally don't like to contemplate the nature of things; they just call everything a commodity and are done with it.
He's done this before, but I jotted it down then and the number was different. I wonder if this is a habit, and/or if these numbers have expiration dates. Maybe that wasn't his mobile.
Thanks for replying to a sincere post that was for some reason modded flamebait. I cite as the "cause" of our general cultural slide a rampant cynicism, an essentially amoral theory that states that anything one wants to do to "get ahead" (esp. in business) is acceptable. The "cause" of this cynicism is another question...
If you read TFA, you see that Gavin's talking about developing open-source software applications as a business, not using said software. It's too complicated to sell software targeting Linux et. al. because there are so many version. I read his thesis statement as:
Since open source software is not a monoculture, it'll be difficult for an ISV to crush all competition and establish decades-long monopoly rents
This is a "drawback" that I, needless to say, can live with.
In short, the first post on this article pretty much could've been the last.
Your sig puts you on my friends list, but fix the typo
'submitting a form without reloading the page! Any easy way to do that?' I must've misunderstood the question but can't you just do an image submit button with onClick=sendFormStufftoPHPScriptThatDoesWhatever() using the xmlhttpreq object?
Title pretty much sums up the topic. Just seems like America hasn't done anything exciting in the last decade, unless you count beating your chest about how exciting all the stuff you're doing is.
from TFA : "Why ship Vista to enterprises with volume license agreements before shipping it to consumers? Businesses are not going to install Vista anyway. Why waste the effort?"
Answer: this is a way of sorta-meeting the (latest) promised release date. Saving face, as it were. So that the fact that you're full of hot vaporware isn't as obvious.
Just a guess
There's another def at work in a lot of the FUD. For TFA's author, Matt Harley "desktop user" means "user who got locked into a bunch of Microsoft or windows-based closed-source applications, often despite warnings about the potential for lock-in if heshe chose that stuff."
Now they're ready to check out Linux, and they're pist b/c there are only 17 email/calendar apps available. There should be 18! And the 18th has to be Outlook!
Now, it's not polite for the Lx crowd to just go "told you so" -- but the fact that this user is locked in is not a flaw in Linux. And when they open up the conversation in that way, they're going to get snide responses.How the hell else are you supposed to know whether you paid enough money for your OS?
I think he got wrapped up in buzzwords at some point, and can't get out. Evolution is not his PIM (Personal Information Manager) of choice. Outlook is. My PIM of choice blows both of those away: it's my #$%^ing brain. Evolution is an email client. And a calendar I don't use. (In point of fact I use thunderbird). On a side-note, just 'cause I don't feel like finding another place to post: "by the time said software does finally make its way down to the Linux user, the Windows crowd has been using it for nearly a year or longer." Funniest line ever. I wasn't aware that Windows users have had beagle-esque integrated search, 3D desktops, genuine multi-user permission security, built-in firewall, etc. for years. What's that movie where Keanu and Sandra live in different times? Or Meg Ryan and Hugh Jackman do the same thing? Are windows users living in Jan 2008 now?
I was excited there for a minute...
Ted "series of tubes" Stevens and the rest of the Commerce Committee. With the exception, IIRC, of John Sununu.
Why buy $100 laptops when you can buy UMPCs? They do twice as much at six times the cost!!!
I saw this presentation. It sucks. Woodside pointed it at his mom, and the damn thing thought it was his aunt.
I thought about that last bit a little more and realized there are plenty of situations where simple read-access could be dangerous... well, I use PEAR::DB anyway.