In a Representative Republic, you are electing a proxy for yourself. This means that people are naturally going to choose people who agree with them. When someone shares your religion they are more likely to agree with you on things that religion influences.
I'd say its a comfort level.
Then again, you guys dumped all the fucking puritans on us. The US is just what Britain would be if not for the Restoration of the Monarchy. We have a bunch of damned Cromwells over here.
The Clintons and the Bushes are like political Herpes. In my life time, we have had Reagan/Bush, Reagan/Bush, Bush/Quale, Clinton/Gore, Clinton/Gore, Bush/Cheney, Bush/ Cheney -- complete with all the usual suspects from the 80s and 90s... and the fucking Ford administration, too!!
I am SO FUCKIGN GLAD its not going to be another 8 years of Clinton -- followed by what, Jeb Bush then Chelsey Clinton?
Bush Sr. and Clinton palling around...
but yeah, study hard, stay away from drugs and out of cyber-porn on the internet and YOU could be President of the United States some day.... pfft
I work in politics, mostly around a bunch of Republicans. I hear many a reputable rumor that McCain is looking at Bobby Jindhal for VP.
He's only 37, is Indian but converted from Hindu to catholic a while back, has run many businesses, was a Congressman and then won a special election to be Governor of Louisiana.
He's younger than Obama, equally not white, and has actually done a thing or two that are worth while.
Frankly, I'd be totally OK with him as President -- then again, I am still trying to figure out if I hate McCain or Obama more.
I'm saying that a lot of people -- especially these days -- to whom Linux was billed as an "alternative" to Windows expect it to look like Windows, work like Windows, and do the same sort of things Windows does.
Let us ignore commodity hardware for a second and think back a few years.
One would not buy a "PC" to run scientific applications or do any serious 3D modeling -- that is what Sun and SGI were for. Likewise, while one COULD generate documents on a an O2, just using Office or WordPerfect on a "PC" is a lot easier.
f/oss operating systems, but running on commodity hardware confuse the issue for people who have for so long connected "PC" with DOS/Windows. A lot of people in their 40s/50s still call it "IBM," even if its a Dell.
Then along come people, most of whom have a political agenda or just hate Microsoft, and try and "convert" people to Linux. "Its like Windows, only better," they say -- just like how people will describe GIMP as "like photoshop, only better" or "free photoshop."
Then the 'convert' comes with their preconceived notions of what the system is supposed to do -- and they EXPECT it to be "like Windows" or "free photoshop."
Then those people bitch and complain because they feel let down.
Linux is fine, if its not trying to be Windows. GIMP is fine, if its not trying to be Photoshop.
But then those same people with the political agenda, but this time just the ones with coding skills, they come out and try and make the system MORE like Windows, MORE like Photoshop, etc.
So, in the process of trying to cater to people who switched from Windows because they hated it, they make the system more like Windows -- and start to whittle away the stuff that made the system different and good in the first place, at least from a technological standpoint.
However, I suppose it makes sense to them that a half-assed rip-off of windows that is at least "free" is somehow better than "the real thing." It just confuses the issue and really to no avail.
This is why I use BSD -- because I don't really give a crap about "free software," converting people, etc. I care that the system works and does what I want, and if I don't have code for nvidia drivers, then tough noogies. When I was in high school I used to shell out for XiG Accelerated X server instead of using XFree86, too. If I had been able to afford BSD/OS back then, I would have bought it, too.
If BSD hadn't "enabled" Microsoft, they'd have created their own, super-crappy TCP stack, made the vast hoards of their userbase think the 'net was crappy and would never catch on. Without them using it, no, it wouldn't.
Without that market, there would have been no reason for half the stuff out on the web today to be created. Without suckers who can't live without YouTube, the broadband market wouldn't really be there and we'd all have to be shelling out buku bucks for T1 or some lame-ass ISDN, or suffering on dialup.
I'd like to see how you like downloading Ubuntu ISOs over dialup. I seriously doubt that you'd enjoy it.
It was also fairly fashionable to hate on Mac before OS X. What is so great about OS X? BSD -- that's what. And they even let most of their changes to borrowed code back into the wild.
I don't love Mac and I don't hate Microsoft, and I'm perfectly fine with the BSDL. Then again, I also don't mind paying for things if they're "better."
But, if I already decided I'm all about the GPL and issued my code under the GPL, then by accepting their code under the GPL I haven't become any more encumbered/fettered than I already was.
I'm not arguing that I gain copyright over their code, just that it doesn't cost me anything I haven't already given up to use their code as well.
Of course, the key to the whole thing, both BSD and GPL, is that we choose what we want to do with our code when we release it, and other people can either choose to accept or reject our terms. If they don't like our rules, they can make their own code and stfu instead of stealing/cheating then acting indignant when they get called out on it.
Using BSD code isn't ANYTHING like killing me and stealing my wallet. It's like me leaving stuff out on my lawn with a sign saying, "Take what you want -- just tell people where you got it."
BSD license is an invitation to take and use. No, this is not a holy war, but the GPL -- especially v3, is by its very nature political to a level of religious zeal equaled only by supporters of Ron Paul or Barak Obama.
If I release code under BSD, that code is always under BSD. If someone else releases a new product based on my code, they have to admit it -- but they can keep their code to themselves if they so wish.
I haven't lost anything, because no one took MY code and told me I couldn't use it anymore. Likewise, I didn't *TAKE AWAY* their ability to do what they wanted with THEIR WORK.
No freedom is lost under BSD.
Under GPL, if someone uses my code to do something else, then their code effectively becomes my code as well, and they have to play by my rules. Therefore, I am restricting their ability to access control over their own time and creative works. I have effectively limited the other developer.
"End users" by the definition probably don't give a crap if they can see the code. If they did anything with it, they'd be developers. I don't see how end users lose out either way -- license arguments really only affect other developers.... not that I'm biased or anything (checks name again)... nope, not biased at all...
a) write your own damned software if you want to be a scrudge about it, or
b) don't violate the license in the first place.
talks of how to escape punishment after getting caught violating the license are about as productive as talks about how to escape punishment after getting caught robbing a bank.
I plan on experimenting with Pico-ITX, or perhaps ARM systems this year, trying to see if I can't power a reasonably useful system on solar or so. I probably wouldn't want to be doing a buildworld every week on one, but it'd be nice to have something power efficient to idle IRC...
there is always going to be a place for hulking, massive systems -- however, we should try and make them as power efficient as possible.
GK Chesterton once wrote, 'there has never been a revolution that was not a reinstitution' - or something very similar to that.
With the new crop of machines like the EEE PC it seems that we're moving back to small, power-efficient machines as opposed to huge hulkers.
Hopefully, as people become more conscience of the cost of energy, both in economic and environmental terms, we'll see more applications of low-power consumption chips like ARM and 20hours of battery life won't seem so amazing anymore.
I'm sorry that you got screwed over. Yes, a lot of airline pilots were military pilots, but many where not. My father wasn't a military pilot and he flew for USAir for 23 years. He'd done other things before then -- charter, air shows, etc.
the difference between "commercial" and "private" is pretty much how often you have to take your medical exam. Airlines are hiring kids these days with only a couple hundred hours of time, then running them through type-rating and then sticking them on the line.
I took lessons from when I was 12 to when I was 17 (I didn't get to solo because of Sept 11, then av fuel prices shot up, so i had to give it up); my dad has pretty much made a living as a pilot since he was 18; my grand father was a navy pilot from 1936-1942 (medical discharge), and my great uncle was a PanAm pilot for 30 years, so I can vouch with a certain degree of "insider" info that its not that hard to get into it, really.
It just sucks a whole lot once you're there and you'd have hated flying after a while. All commercial pilots say this, and I suppose its like the programmer who after he gets home, the last thing he wants to do is write more code.
As to lasik surgery, you only have to wait 6 months. If you joined the Army instead of the Air Force, you can become a Warrant Officer and fly aircraft -- they mostly have choppers, but a few fixed-wing as well. You only need 15 college credits for that.
I know that GNU's Not UNIX -- but it was supposed to try and be. The real question is, why should Linux try and be "largely compatible" with Windows?
If it were meant to be an "alternative" to windows, using your metric of "largely compatible," then it shouldn't have been a UNIX clone, it should have been a DOS/Win32 clone, shouldn't it have?
Linux "fails" to take to the Desktop because it fails to be Windows. It fails to be Windows because it is not -- it's Unix. And that means it has a completely different underlying philosophy of how things should be done that goes back over 30 years.
Then again, it seems that most people who "switch" to Linux, especially these days, do it because they want cheap/free windows, then complain when its not windows.
This is like buying a Crysler 300M then complaining that its not as nice as the Bentley Brooklands that its a rip-off of.
You just make using it illegal. They'll never destroy it, just like that'll never destroy marijuana or coca. they just throw your ass in jail for having anything to do with it, and let you rot for a while
I probably should have said "all the local government cares about, however" -- politicians don't actually think things through to their logical conclusion unless it's at the bottom of the other guy's slippery slope.
I was attempting to make a joke based on the fact that everyone seems to hate the user named "twitter" who allegedly has a vast army of fake accounts he uses to reply to himself and create little Socratic dialogs to solicit karma.
Yeah, the cops want to get people to drive safely because they don't want to have to scrape them off the road. All the local government cares about is the revenue from the tickets -- just like the recent story of cities reprogramming traffic lights to feature shorter yellows so that more people can get busted for running reds.
I suspect that FreeNet is something that many, many governments would like to shut down. In the west, pretty much all they have to do is say "klddy pr0n" and it's gone. In China and other such countries, they don't really have to say anything at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Obama is half white. Bobby Jindal is "pure" Indian... I think that's what he was insinuating. Obama is still half crusty old white guy :-p
Indian-American, not to be confused with American Indian. He was born here.
In a Representative Republic, you are electing a proxy for yourself. This means that people are naturally going to choose people who agree with them. When someone shares your religion they are more likely to agree with you on things that religion influences.
I'd say its a comfort level.
Then again, you guys dumped all the fucking puritans on us. The US is just what Britain would be if not for the Restoration of the Monarchy. We have a bunch of damned Cromwells over here.
yes, about EURO 8million worth...
The Clintons and the Bushes are like political Herpes. In my life time, we have had Reagan/Bush, Reagan/Bush, Bush/Quale, Clinton/Gore, Clinton/Gore, Bush/Cheney, Bush/ Cheney -- complete with all the usual suspects from the 80s and 90s... and the fucking Ford administration, too!!
I am SO FUCKIGN GLAD its not going to be another 8 years of Clinton -- followed by what, Jeb Bush then Chelsey Clinton?
Bush Sr. and Clinton palling around...
but yeah, study hard, stay away from drugs and out of cyber-porn on the internet and YOU could be President of the United States some day.... pfft
sure.
I work in politics, mostly around a bunch of Republicans. I hear many a reputable rumor that McCain is looking at Bobby Jindhal for VP.
He's only 37, is Indian but converted from Hindu to catholic a while back, has run many businesses, was a Congressman and then won a special election to be Governor of Louisiana.
He's younger than Obama, equally not white, and has actually done a thing or two that are worth while.
Frankly, I'd be totally OK with him as President -- then again, I am still trying to figure out if I hate McCain or Obama more.
I'm saying that a lot of people -- especially these days -- to whom Linux was billed as an "alternative" to Windows expect it to look like Windows, work like Windows, and do the same sort of things Windows does.
Let us ignore commodity hardware for a second and think back a few years.
One would not buy a "PC" to run scientific applications or do any serious 3D modeling -- that is what Sun and SGI were for. Likewise, while one COULD generate documents on a an O2, just using Office or WordPerfect on a "PC" is a lot easier.
f/oss operating systems, but running on commodity hardware confuse the issue for people who have for so long connected "PC" with DOS/Windows. A lot of people in their 40s/50s still call it "IBM," even if its a Dell.
Then along come people, most of whom have a political agenda or just hate Microsoft, and try and "convert" people to Linux. "Its like Windows, only better," they say -- just like how people will describe GIMP as "like photoshop, only better" or "free photoshop."
Then the 'convert' comes with their preconceived notions of what the system is supposed to do -- and they EXPECT it to be "like Windows" or "free photoshop."
Then those people bitch and complain because they feel let down.
Linux is fine, if its not trying to be Windows. GIMP is fine, if its not trying to be Photoshop.
But then those same people with the political agenda, but this time just the ones with coding skills, they come out and try and make the system MORE like Windows, MORE like Photoshop, etc.
So, in the process of trying to cater to people who switched from Windows because they hated it, they make the system more like Windows -- and start to whittle away the stuff that made the system different and good in the first place, at least from a technological standpoint.
However, I suppose it makes sense to them that a half-assed rip-off of windows that is at least "free" is somehow better than "the real thing." It just confuses the issue and really to no avail.
This is why I use BSD -- because I don't really give a crap about "free software," converting people, etc. I care that the system works and does what I want, and if I don't have code for nvidia drivers, then tough noogies. When I was in high school I used to shell out for XiG Accelerated X server instead of using XFree86, too. If I had been able to afford BSD/OS back then, I would have bought it, too.
If BSD hadn't "enabled" Microsoft, they'd have created their own, super-crappy TCP stack, made the vast hoards of their userbase think the 'net was crappy and would never catch on. Without them using it, no, it wouldn't.
Without that market, there would have been no reason for half the stuff out on the web today to be created. Without suckers who can't live without YouTube, the broadband market wouldn't really be there and we'd all have to be shelling out buku bucks for T1 or some lame-ass ISDN, or suffering on dialup.
I'd like to see how you like downloading Ubuntu ISOs over dialup. I seriously doubt that you'd enjoy it.
It was also fairly fashionable to hate on Mac before OS X. What is so great about OS X? BSD -- that's what. And they even let most of their changes to borrowed code back into the wild.
I don't love Mac and I don't hate Microsoft, and I'm perfectly fine with the BSDL. Then again, I also don't mind paying for things if they're "better."
But, if I already decided I'm all about the GPL and issued my code under the GPL, then by accepting their code under the GPL I haven't become any more encumbered/fettered than I already was.
I'm not arguing that I gain copyright over their code, just that it doesn't cost me anything I haven't already given up to use their code as well.
Of course, the key to the whole thing, both BSD and GPL, is that we choose what we want to do with our code when we release it, and other people can either choose to accept or reject our terms. If they don't like our rules, they can make their own code and stfu instead of stealing/cheating then acting indignant when they get called out on it.
But by creating the need for "license compatibility," I have already exercised control over their code -- I have dictated the terms of the license.
That license then gives me unfettered access to their changes to my code, which I can accept or reject. That is another flexing of control.
Using BSD code isn't ANYTHING like killing me and stealing my wallet. It's like me leaving stuff out on my lawn with a sign saying, "Take what you want -- just tell people where you got it."
BSD license is an invitation to take and use. No, this is not a holy war, but the GPL -- especially v3, is by its very nature political to a level of religious zeal equaled only by supporters of Ron Paul or Barak Obama.
code forks not withstanding...
however, the original developer, and the original branch of the product can still user whatever the forkers created.
I agree that since data can be replicated infinitely that it makes it slightly harder to draw distinctions as to gain and loss, though.
If I release code under BSD, that code is always under BSD. If someone else releases a new product based on my code, they have to admit it -- but they can keep their code to themselves if they so wish.
... not that I'm biased or anything (checks name again)... nope, not biased at all...
I haven't lost anything, because no one took MY code and told me I couldn't use it anymore. Likewise, I didn't *TAKE AWAY* their ability to do what they wanted with THEIR WORK.
No freedom is lost under BSD.
Under GPL, if someone uses my code to do something else, then their code effectively becomes my code as well, and they have to play by my rules. Therefore, I am restricting their ability to access control over their own time and creative works. I have effectively limited the other developer.
"End users" by the definition probably don't give a crap if they can see the code. If they did anything with it, they'd be developers. I don't see how end users lose out either way -- license arguments really only affect other developers.
of course, the least-risky options are
a) write your own damned software if you want to be a scrudge about it, or
b) don't violate the license in the first place.
talks of how to escape punishment after getting caught violating the license are about as productive as talks about how to escape punishment after getting caught robbing a bank.
Its best to just not do it in the first place.
I haven't read that, but I figured that it would be best to use a battery, then use my renweable energy source to recharge the battery...
I'm thinking of rigging up a mini wind turbine/solar array.
I plan on experimenting with Pico-ITX, or perhaps ARM systems this year, trying to see if I can't power a reasonably useful system on solar or so. I probably wouldn't want to be doing a buildworld every week on one, but it'd be nice to have something power efficient to idle IRC...
there is always going to be a place for hulking, massive systems -- however, we should try and make them as power efficient as possible.
GK Chesterton once wrote, 'there has never been a revolution that was not a reinstitution' - or something very similar to that.
With the new crop of machines like the EEE PC it seems that we're moving back to small, power-efficient machines as opposed to huge hulkers.
Hopefully, as people become more conscience of the cost of energy, both in economic and environmental terms, we'll see more applications of low-power consumption chips like ARM and 20hours of battery life won't seem so amazing anymore.
I'm sorry that you got screwed over. Yes, a lot of airline pilots were military pilots, but many where not. My father wasn't a military pilot and he flew for USAir for 23 years. He'd done other things before then -- charter, air shows, etc.
the difference between "commercial" and "private" is pretty much how often you have to take your medical exam. Airlines are hiring kids these days with only a couple hundred hours of time, then running them through type-rating and then sticking them on the line.
I took lessons from when I was 12 to when I was 17 (I didn't get to solo because of Sept 11, then av fuel prices shot up, so i had to give it up); my dad has pretty much made a living as a pilot since he was 18; my grand father was a navy pilot from 1936-1942 (medical discharge), and my great uncle was a PanAm pilot for 30 years, so I can vouch with a certain degree of "insider" info that its not that hard to get into it, really.
It just sucks a whole lot once you're there and you'd have hated flying after a while. All commercial pilots say this, and I suppose its like the programmer who after he gets home, the last thing he wants to do is write more code.
As to lasik surgery, you only have to wait 6 months. If you joined the Army instead of the Air Force, you can become a Warrant Officer and fly aircraft -- they mostly have choppers, but a few fixed-wing as well. You only need 15 college credits for that.
I know that GNU's Not UNIX -- but it was supposed to try and be. The real question is, why should Linux try and be "largely compatible" with Windows?
If it were meant to be an "alternative" to windows, using your metric of "largely compatible," then it shouldn't have been a UNIX clone, it should have been a DOS/Win32 clone, shouldn't it have?
Linux "fails" to take to the Desktop because it fails to be Windows. It fails to be Windows because it is not -- it's Unix. And that means it has a completely different underlying philosophy of how things should be done that goes back over 30 years.
Then again, it seems that most people who "switch" to Linux, especially these days, do it because they want cheap/free windows, then complain when its not windows.
This is like buying a Crysler 300M then complaining that its not as nice as the Bentley Brooklands that its a rip-off of.
You just make using it illegal. They'll never destroy it, just like that'll never destroy marijuana or coca. they just throw your ass in jail for having anything to do with it, and let you rot for a while
I probably should have said "all the local government cares about, however" -- politicians don't actually think things through to their logical conclusion unless it's at the bottom of the other guy's slippery slope.
I was attempting to make a joke based on the fact that everyone seems to hate the user named "twitter" who allegedly has a vast army of fake accounts he uses to reply to himself and create little Socratic dialogs to solicit karma.
of course, now its not funny anymore.
Yeah, the cops want to get people to drive safely because they don't want to have to scrape them off the road. All the local government cares about is the revenue from the tickets -- just like the recent story of cities reprogramming traffic lights to feature shorter yellows so that more people can get busted for running reds.
Man, who *IS* this guy that his trolling has gotten its own front page article?
I suspect that FreeNet is something that many, many governments would like to shut down. In the west, pretty much all they have to do is say "klddy pr0n" and it's gone. In China and other such countries, they don't really have to say anything at all.