Imagine that - not wanting to pay money to a corrupt industry that wants payment from everybody both innocent and guilty, just in case thery do something wrong.
Imagine if the laws the media industry 'buy' were appplied to other products. Knife manufacturers would face life imprisonment (or the death penalty) incase someone buying one of their knives killed someone with it, Ford and Honda executives would be locked up on the off chance that one of their cars was used as a getaway car, and makers of mobile phones would face a free holiday in Gitmo because a nutter could use one of their phones to remotely detonate a bomb.
You go music industry, I love you and your purchased laws and taxes!!
Funny, I thought the idea of companies was to make products, and that money is a means to that end.
You have it completely the wrong way around. The majority of companies exist for the sole reason of making money. It's the products that are a means to an end.
You are right, of course. They can choose the platforms to support. I think the belief many of us have is that if MS Office was producted by an independent company, it would have been ported to Linux by now. Of course, we don't know that.
Maybe, maybe not. So what though? I don't see why MS should be blamed for not actively supporting a product that competes with their flagship product.
Who suggested that MS Office should change it's license? And do you think you can pick your license if you choose a commercial product? Many who use GPL do in fact offer other licensing options for a fee.
Nobody suggested that, I was using as an example to point out how absurd the "Microsoft should do XYZ cos I say so!!" claims are. The only reasons MS should ever have to do anything is (a) to create value for their shareholders and themselves, and (b) because they'd be breaking a law if they didn't.
No, as far as I'm aware, it's original ASP to PHP. Since both are plain scripting it's (relatively) easy, but going from ASP.NET to PHP would be completely different.
Reading about it on JoS a while ago, he says that it's not a general converter either - it only works because they follow certain strict rules when coding, that the translator can take advantage of. Let is loose on masses of random code written any which way and you'd probably find bad things happen.
A general purpose translator for this sort of thing is 5% of the work. The other 95% of the effort is in getting all of the corner cases and other oddities working right. Joel got around this by skipping the 2nd 95% and just coding in a certain manner.
Funny, I thought that the idea of companies was to make money.
Supporting your major applications on a minority platform where a large number of the users have an irrational hatred of your company anyway?
Why the absurd claim that by not supporting every single minority OS out there, MS are not a real software company? That's like claiming that dogs aren't animals because they don't wqear contact lenses - the two ideas are completely different.
Looking at it the other way, code should never be GPL'd. A real developer wouldn't care about the license the user of the code wants to use.. Who cares about the license the customer choses, you should support it regardless. Of course, with the OSS community being a 1 trick pony, I wouldn't expect anything else.
3072 bytes? Well I guess that's good old M$ bloat in action! Why on Linux such a hello world app only takes up 3065 bytes, proving just how bloated, evil, slow blah blah M$ is!
Stop destroying the world with bloated 3072 byte hello world apps!
(Hey, biased religious insanity is the correct way to counter a factual statement disproving an incorrect sterotype regarding Windows, right?)
You can make as many extras toolbars as you want - have 6 on each edge of the screen, and 5 floating about on your desktop if you want.
Try reading what the guy actually wrote instead of having a mental proces that goes "I hate Windows, therefore Windows sucks, therefore what he said is wrong and you can't really do that".
Wow, what a completely inept analogy. Of course computer parts won't randomly create a computer when shook, but that's because unlike molecues that are not self arranging.
Funny, you can mix oxygen and hydrogen, add a bit of heat and BAM! water. Funny how all of those atoms arranged themselves into H2O molecules. That can't be though - all we did was shake, heat, and mix. From your computer parts analogy we have solid proof that water can never form!
Oh and those experiments in test tubes - call be back after they have a planet sized test tube that they've left running on a contiunuous test for 200m years. Then your bizarre claim will sound more like 'proof' than "it didn't happen in a test tube during 24 hours, so it'll never ever ever happen anywhere!"
Right, because out of those uncountable number of possible arrangements for proteins, the only ones possible for life are the ones we use.
Did it never occur to you that perhaps we don't use the proteins we use because they are the only molecute capable of the job, bu merely because they are the ones that were at hand?
Don't be so damn arrogant and idiotic assuming that what you see is all that is possible.
There are countless billions of potential protein arrangements that could help life arise - we just happen to be using a few of them, but that does not make those few special in any particular way.
The difference being important or not depends entirely on who the topic of conversation is.
If we're talking about the patent office, yes that difference matters.
If we're talking about Amazon (which we are) it makes zero difference. From a morality and ethics point of view, applying for and getting something so absurd is the exact same as applying for it and not getting it.
Next week's Amazon patent - combining 'letters' to form 'words', except phrased in a confusing manner so as to confuse the IQ-of-30 grunts at the patent office.
"Ug, Amazon say is new, Amazon get patent. Me kill dinosaur!"
Where would we be if the Free Software licenses had a non-commercial clause?
Making your own stuff, or paying for it, instead of leeching from the efforts of others?
Anyway, how come you want the BBC to release their stuff as free for any use, but you won't do the same with yours? Why should they give you their stuff for free for you to make money from, but you won't give me your stuff for free?
I guess you don't understand the meaning of the word "opened". It doesn't mean "give aaway for free to any loser that wants it". It means giving those who have paid for it access to it.
Okay, tell me where to find all these archived Dr. Who episodes and other brit stuff I like to watch. For free.
You can't - and why the hell should you be able to? If you want to see it - pay like everyone else.
I never said I had a right to anything. The BBC is trying to present this effort as making their content "open" when its not. I never said the content belongs to me either (although I generally do not view something intangible as having an "owner").
So you want free access to something that isn't yours because of what? Your incessant whining? The BBC haven't presented this as making their stuff "open" in your twisted "give it to me for free OMG why won't you give it to me? Why do you hate freedom?" meaning of the word open. It means open to those who have paid for it, which is 100% reasonable. Well, reasonable to everyone who isn't a selfish moron who wants everyone else to pay in order to bring them free stuff on a silver platter.
Don't like it? Fuck off and make your own damn content.
If you're really implying that all science fiction becomes science fact, I think you should stop posting and start worrying about what you're going to do when Darth Vader/Skynet/Triffids/Bodysnatchers come to get you...
Ummm... so right are granted by genes now then? Rights granted by mixes of chemicals inside a helix molecule inside your cells... a 'different' viewpoint to say the least. DNA as God, and proteins as Angels carrying out his holy mission.
There is no such thing as a fundamental right, only superficial ones granted by society, and they are really just priveledges with a bit more weight behind them.
But then since you can seemingly get branded a child-hating monster of a bad parent nowadays by even looking at your child in a disaproving manner while they rape and old woman... this isn't really surprising.
Children nowadays are given more and more freedom and less and less resonsponsibilites. You can get away with pretty much anything short of murder if you're under 16. What are parents getting in return in order to combat this? Well they're told that it's not their responsibility, and this is reinforced over and over. For those that realise that this is completely stupid and dare actually try and rase their child sensibly, they're attacked for doing so.
Homework is just a tiny fraction of the overall problem here.
The only reaosn I can see for introducing Elephants into the USA is to make the growing (in both senses) population of humungous McDonalds-inflated USAians not feel quite so big.
Next time someone points at them and laughs because they are wider than they are tall, they can reply back that "at least I'm smaller than that Elephant over there... barely. OK, well I'm smaller than two of them".
Or maybe they're just wanting to farm them, since whole cow steaks aren't filling the between breakfast and lunch snack break any more. An entire elephant would be much more filling.
Your concerns over an increasingly illness susceptible population are so true that it hurts.
Add to what you've said increasing abuse of steroids etc for dealing with trivial illnesses - ensuring that only those immune to it survive and spread, and non-mandatory disease control such as innoculations, and we have a wonderful population mix. Some going the extra mile to weed out the weaker strains giving us whole new generations of superbugs, and the other half ensuring that we have a population ripe for it to spread through.
****ing morons. We wiped out smallpox well enough, along with rabies (where I live anyway) and similar a generation or two ago but we appear to have not only failed to learn the lesson from them, but instead are doing our best to make things worse.
Most diseases with us today could be properly eradicated if we actually wanted to.
Do the right thing today - feed your child some filthy dirt.
Huh???? Who the hell is talking aboout pissing off Microsoft, selling your credibility, and such?
I just said that if you are ultimately responsible for something (in this case the network), and don't know the costs involved IN YOUR OWN BUSINESS'S SYSTEMS, you're piss poor at your job. How the hell is putting a figure on what your systems cost you selling your integrity? I call it doing your damn job.
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine that - not wanting to pay money to a corrupt industry that wants payment from everybody both innocent and guilty, just in case thery do something wrong.
Imagine if the laws the media industry 'buy' were appplied to other products. Knife manufacturers would face life imprisonment (or the death penalty) incase someone buying one of their knives killed someone with it, Ford and Honda executives would be locked up on the off chance that one of their cars was used as a getaway car, and makers of mobile phones would face a free holiday in Gitmo because a nutter could use one of their phones to remotely detonate a bomb.
You go music industry, I love you and your purchased laws and taxes!!
In malysia the people vote for who goes into space.
In the powerhouses of democracy such as the US, UK, etc. people are TOLD by a government agency who's going into space.
Funny when you think about it.
Come on - it puts out hydrogen and oxygen. How much more vapory do you think it can be?
Yes, it's amazing how opinions on that sort of thing changes for so many people when the product in question isn't "their's" but "ours".
..I caa't think of a but. It's just hypocritical.
I would say that it's hypocritical but...
Would have been good if it had turned up on 'Lost' though.
B. A courier would take longer. There is no faster way of getting something less than a few thousand miles than flying it yourself.
I don't know about that. 10 metres is less than a few thousand miles, and I know full well that it'd be faster to walk.
Funny, I thought the idea of companies was to make products, and that money is a means to that end.
You have it completely the wrong way around. The majority of companies exist for the sole reason of making money. It's the products that are a means to an end.
You are right, of course. They can choose the platforms to support. I think the belief many of us have is that if MS Office was producted by an independent company, it would have been ported to Linux by now. Of course, we don't know that.
Maybe, maybe not. So what though? I don't see why MS should be blamed for not actively supporting a product that competes with their flagship product.
Who suggested that MS Office should change it's license? And do you think you can pick your license if you choose a commercial product? Many who use GPL do in fact offer other licensing options for a fee.
Nobody suggested that, I was using as an example to point out how absurd the "Microsoft should do XYZ cos I say so!!" claims are.
The only reasons MS should ever have to do anything is (a) to create value for their shareholders and themselves, and (b) because they'd be breaking a law if they didn't.
No, as far as I'm aware, it's original ASP to PHP. Since both are plain scripting it's (relatively) easy, but going from ASP.NET to PHP would be completely different.
Reading about it on JoS a while ago, he says that it's not a general converter either - it only works because they follow certain strict rules when coding, that the translator can take advantage of. Let is loose on masses of random code written any which way and you'd probably find bad things happen.
A general purpose translator for this sort of thing is 5% of the work. The other 95% of the effort is in getting all of the corner cases and other oddities working right. Joel got around this by skipping the 2nd 95% and just coding in a certain manner.
Funny, I thought that the idea of companies was to make money.
Supporting your major applications on a minority platform where a large number of the users have an irrational hatred of your company anyway?
Why the absurd claim that by not supporting every single minority OS out there, MS are not a real software company? That's like claiming that dogs aren't animals because they don't wqear contact lenses - the two ideas are completely different.
Looking at it the other way, code should never be GPL'd. A real developer wouldn't care about the license the user of the code wants to use.. Who cares about the license the customer choses, you should support it regardless.
Of course, with the OSS community being a 1 trick pony, I wouldn't expect anything else.
3072 bytes? Well I guess that's good old M$ bloat in action! Why on Linux such a hello world app only takes up 3065 bytes, proving just how bloated, evil, slow blah blah M$ is!
Stop destroying the world with bloated 3072 byte hello world apps!
(Hey, biased religious insanity is the correct way to counter a factual statement disproving an incorrect sterotype regarding Windows, right?)
Hahaha what ignorance.
You can make as many extras toolbars as you want - have 6 on each edge of the screen, and 5 floating about on your desktop if you want.
Try reading what the guy actually wrote instead of having a mental proces that goes "I hate Windows, therefore Windows sucks, therefore what he said is wrong and you can't really do that".
Wow, what a completely inept analogy. Of course computer parts won't randomly create a computer when shook, but that's because unlike molecues that are not self arranging.
Funny, you can mix oxygen and hydrogen, add a bit of heat and BAM! water. Funny how all of those atoms arranged themselves into H2O molecules. That can't be though - all we did was shake, heat, and mix. From your computer parts analogy we have solid proof that water can never form!
Oh and those experiments in test tubes - call be back after they have a planet sized test tube that they've left running on a contiunuous test for 200m years. Then your bizarre claim will sound more like 'proof' than "it didn't happen in a test tube during 24 hours, so it'll never ever ever happen anywhere!"
Right, because out of those uncountable number of possible arrangements for proteins, the only ones possible for life are the ones we use.
Did it never occur to you that perhaps we don't use the proteins we use because they are the only molecute capable of the job, bu merely because they are the ones that were at hand?
Don't be so damn arrogant and idiotic assuming that what you see is all that is possible.
There are countless billions of potential protein arrangements that could help life arise - we just happen to be using a few of them, but that does not make those few special in any particular way.
The difference being important or not depends entirely on who the topic of conversation is.
If we're talking about the patent office, yes that difference matters.
If we're talking about Amazon (which we are) it makes zero difference. From a morality and ethics point of view, applying for and getting something so absurd is the exact same as applying for it and not getting it.
Next week's Amazon patent - combining 'letters' to form 'words', except phrased in a confusing manner so as to confuse the IQ-of-30 grunts at the patent office.
"Ug, Amazon say is new, Amazon get patent. Me kill dinosaur!"
Where would we be if the Free Software licenses had a non-commercial clause?
Making your own stuff, or paying for it, instead of leeching from the efforts of others?
Anyway, how come you want the BBC to release their stuff as free for any use, but you won't do the same with yours? Why should they give you their stuff for free for you to make money from, but you won't give me your stuff for free?
"The BBC has opened its Creative Archive"
I guess you don't understand the meaning of the word "opened". It doesn't mean "give aaway for free to any loser that wants it". It means giving those who have paid for it access to it.
Okay, tell me where to find all these archived Dr. Who episodes and other brit stuff I like to watch. For free.
You can't - and why the hell should you be able to? If you want to see it - pay like everyone else.
I never said I had a right to anything. The BBC is trying to present this effort as making their content "open" when its not. I never said the content belongs to me either (although I generally do not view something intangible as having an "owner").
So you want free access to something that isn't yours because of what? Your incessant whining? The BBC haven't presented this as making their stuff "open" in your twisted "give it to me for free OMG why won't you give it to me? Why do you hate freedom?" meaning of the word open. It means open to those who have paid for it, which is 100% reasonable. Well, reasonable to everyone who isn't a selfish moron who wants everyone else to pay in order to bring them free stuff on a silver platter.
Don't like it? Fuck off and make your own damn content.
And no science fiction ever became fact...
If you're really implying that all science fiction becomes science fact, I think you should stop posting and start worrying about what you're going to do when Darth Vader/Skynet/Triffids/Bodysnatchers come to get you...
Ummm... so right are granted by genes now then? Rights granted by mixes of chemicals inside a helix molecule inside your cells... a 'different' viewpoint to say the least. DNA as God, and proteins as Angels carrying out his holy mission.
There is no such thing as a fundamental right, only superficial ones granted by society, and they are really just priveledges with a bit more weight behind them.
I'm still waiting for my microwave-controlled nanotube jetpack, powered by stirling engines and hydrogen fuel cells.
It strongly absorbs microwaves for localized heating (leading to applications ... in windshield warming)
Yeah, I'm going to have a microwave generator going in my car, aiming the the windshield, just to warm it up. That's got to be safe right?
Just a shame we can't do something slightly safer, like send a small electric currents through tiny wires, or blow hot air at it.
But oh no... we have to shoot microwaves through our cars instead.
What I meant, of course, is the freedom to commit crimes without fear of retribution.
How very true.
But then since you can seemingly get branded a child-hating monster of a bad parent nowadays by even looking at your child in a disaproving manner while they rape and old woman... this isn't really surprising.
Children nowadays are given more and more freedom and less and less resonsponsibilites. You can get away with pretty much anything short of murder if you're under 16. What are parents getting in return in order to combat this? Well they're told that it's not their responsibility, and this is reinforced over and over. For those that realise that this is completely stupid and dare actually try and rase their child sensibly, they're attacked for doing so.
Homework is just a tiny fraction of the overall problem here.
The only reaosn I can see for introducing Elephants into the USA is to make the growing (in both senses) population of humungous McDonalds-inflated USAians not feel quite so big.
Next time someone points at them and laughs because they are wider than they are tall, they can reply back that "at least I'm smaller than that Elephant over there... barely. OK, well I'm smaller than two of them".
Or maybe they're just wanting to farm them, since whole cow steaks aren't filling the between breakfast and lunch snack break any more. An entire elephant would be much more filling.
Your concerns over an increasingly illness susceptible population are so true that it hurts.
Add to what you've said increasing abuse of steroids etc for dealing with trivial illnesses - ensuring that only those immune to it survive and spread, and non-mandatory disease control such as innoculations, and we have a wonderful population mix. Some going the extra mile to weed out the weaker strains giving us whole new generations of superbugs, and the other half ensuring that we have a population ripe for it to spread through.
****ing morons. We wiped out smallpox well enough, along with rabies (where I live anyway) and similar a generation or two ago but we appear to have not only failed to learn the lesson from them, but instead are doing our best to make things worse.
Most diseases with us today could be properly eradicated if we actually wanted to.
Do the right thing today - feed your child some filthy dirt.
Huh???? Who the hell is talking aboout pissing off Microsoft, selling your credibility, and such?
I just said that if you are ultimately responsible for something (in this case the network), and don't know the costs involved IN YOUR OWN BUSINESS'S SYSTEMS, you're piss poor at your job. How the hell is putting a figure on what your systems cost you selling your integrity? I call it doing your damn job.