I look at it as just the opposite. I was a geek in grade school. Big time. My friends and I all got picked on, teased, harassed, and abused. It wasn't until we got into high school where we realised there were a bunch of people getting picked on, and that we could work together to over come the bullying. When someone was harassed in high school, we would stick up for them. It's a lot harder for a bully to pick on a geek if they are surrounded by 4 other geeks. Combat boots and trench coats don't hurt either;)
By my senior year the Geeks and the Hessians (for-mentioned combat boot/trench coat wearing people as they were known in my school) had a pretty smooth life. We had numbers and strong men enough to keep the jocks at bay, the hicks had lost their primary leadership the year before, and the self proclaimed 'wiggers' (truly a retarded title for a social cliche) were all show.
Any ways, any movie that promotes geeks, nerds, and other social out-casts to unite and deter bullying (preferably non-violently) in my book is a great thing.
Agreed. The page is poorly written, boring, and very smoothed over, but there are links and references to many of the objections. The article author appears to be mad that his anti-WM statements were removed from the Wiki page.
Not that I am pro-WM, I think they have a couple of ethical problems with their employment practices. But I think the wiki article is a proper wiki article.
Where do you think the money for our national debt comes from? China has over $260bil in US Treasury bonds. Japan has even more. And a LOT of this deficite spending activity has been on Bush's plate. When Clinton left office the debt was $5.6tril, and grew $20bil hist last year (compared to $400bil his first year). Right now the debt is estimated at $8.3tril. Almost 3 trillion dollars spent in 5 years... crazy.
Agreed. Intel's GROWTH is falling behind AMD's growth. Intel still has a firm grip on the market. Intel still sold more chips then AMD. Intel is only falling behind their previous performance. Which as mentioned in TFA, is still within their historical variance.
So true, I run a manual scan for spyware and virus's maybe once every few months. I haven't seen anything on my computer in the last 2 years because of responsible surfing habbits.
This article is nothing more then a company trying to sell you something by creating a bogus "test" that will show you why you need their product.
True, I should have sited that, but I was on my way out of work. If I get a chance later tonight I'll see if I can't find supporting (or contradictory!) evidence.
"We randomly assigned 100 male undergraduates aged 18-21 to play a game relatively high in violence, Grand Theft Auto III, or a game relatively low in violence, The Simpsons: Hit and Run."
So they used 100 guys 18-21, likely most of which were from one geographic area. They also had no control group, so there is no way to prove that Gamers are any different than Non-Gamers, only that 18-21yr old males who play these games have some difference.
"Those study participants who played Grand Theft Auto III had greater increases in diastolic blood pressure from a baseline rest period to gameplay in comparison to participants who played The Simpsons."
Which is much more likely based on the fact that GTA has much more realism and realistic punishments. Death and prison register in our minds as real possible penalties. Death of a cartoon figure registers as little more then a Saturday morning cartoon with little association.
"After gameplay, GTA III players had more negative feelings, more uncooperative behavior, and thought that using alcohol and marijuana was less harmful to their health than players of The Simpsons."
other then being subjective and with out statistical backing, this is a great result. With only 100 people in the pool, any findings could be easily skewed by a few outliers. Also, there is nothing that states the pool sizes. So if the GTA pool had 65 participants and the TS pool had 35, it would be factual to say that the GTA group had more negative feelings. Also, the result is poorly worded, I highly doubt that everyone in the GTA group thought that "using alcohol and marijuana was less harmful to their health." It is more likely that GTP players were "more likely to think that using alcohol and marijuana was less harmful to their health."
"Among those people who grew up in more violent homes and communities... Among those people who grew up in more violent communities..."
So now, out of 100 people they are making conclusions for the entire male 18-21 gaming community based on a hand full of people. Assuming a third of the participants grew up in a violent house hold, another third in a violent community, and the final third grew up in Mayberry, and then each of these groups was evenly distributed between GTA and TS, you're looking at 16 people to base your research off of.
"Consistent with the results of many other people's research"
None of which appears to be sited.
With no statistics posted, this should outright be tossed as a valueless publication. And judging by their claims and process, any statistically substantial findings they made are most likely due to outliers skewing the results.
All jokes aside, Regular DVDs are going to be the reigning king for a while to come. Both formats will have a hard time gaining wide spread acceptance as long as the competitor is out there. Especially since in the movie arena, neither has any current offerings that provide consumers with a large tangible advantage over regular DVDs. Movies @ 1024i are pretty, but they are not hundreds of dollars prettier then Movies @ 480p (err what ever EDTV/DVDs are recorded at).
That is actually one of my concerns as a (PC) game modder. A lot of 3rd party add-ons for video games live by reading the game's memory. Depending on how this new feature operates, it could block off an entire array of 3rd party modifications to games.
The Cell processor has much wider market desires then just the PS3. It is likely that the PS3 will not take this feature as an advantage, but the feature will be there for Linux based Cell Processor servers. In those kinds of system, memory protection can be extremely important.
2 tickets to an evening showing of the latest movie: $17.00. Bucket of popcorn and soda: $6.00. Gas to drive to theater and back (in new 44mpg car) $3.00. Cost of babysitter: $0.00 (Thanks to Grandma!). Total cost: $26.00
New released DVD: $20.00. 2-liter soda and popcorn: $5.00. Gas: $0.00 (Bestbuy on route home). Babysitter: $0.00. Total Cost: $25.00
Not to mention at home we can pause the movie if we need to get up. And if we do like the movie, we can watch it again.
All in all, $20.00 doesn't seem like that bad of a deal to me. At $1.50 a movie, they have to be looking at 10 million sales to GROSS the cost of a bargin basement movie. Most likely they'll need close to 40 million sales at $1.50 just to cover the cost of the movie and distrobution. And that's just for a $15mil movie. Imagine trying to turn a profit off of a AAA title!
And we're not talking about Jimbo in his dorm room downloading a song, we're talking about companies that rip and re-press DVDs for resale and mass market distrobution. Nah, the primary issues are 1) copy right infringement. And 2) the artificially low value of Chinesse currency.
I am. I have been this whole time. To quote myself: "I think Free Software is neat. I think it is going to play a continued roll in the market of software development. I don't think, nor do I want all software to become free software."
"You have many desktop environments to choose from (GNOME and KDE being the most popular right now), many MTA servers (email), office suites, MUA (email clients) etc... etc..."
I'm not talking about a single system. I'm talking about a single total solution. as in ALL SOFTWARE. Not all desktop environment, not all MTA servers, not all office suits. I mean ALL software. All of those you listed and the thousands of other field. The Market will determine to correct combination of Free and non-Free software. Neither one is the absolute correct answer.
"Not it's not. Not when it's as clearly defined as the Free Software definition."
That is the definition of "Free Software", not to beconfused with FREEDOM, which believe it or not, expands beyond the scope of software. FREEDOM is extremely subjective. Free Software is more clearly defined, but still has subjective points.
"[Freedom for the... coders limits the freedom of... coders.] Completely bogus statement."
Absolutely not. License your Free software under GPL3. GPL3 gives you the Freedom of some control over your code. GPL3 removes the Freedom of derivative programmers to incorporate your code into (or incorperate into your code) a DRM system. License under GPL2 and the derivative coders have more freedom, and you have less. IMO - In order to be truely free (as in free speach), the derivative programmers need to have exactly the same rights as the original coder. If that means wrapping a DRM in it, shrink wrapping a box and selling it retail, so be it.
"Any proprietary software automatically shrinks the market to one entity."
Now that is a completely bogus statement. Office is proprietary, but OO exists, and numerous other proprietary office apps existed before it. Windows is proprietary but Apple, Linux, Unix, BSD and others (both proprietary and not) continue to exist. IE is proprietary, but FF flurishes. Often proprietary systems are the only system available in a market segment, but that has more to do with the costs of software development, and the market than with wether the system is proprietary or not.
"There's one person in this discussion who's being deliberately pretending to "support Free Software but..." and that's who is in need of a clear dosage of clarity for he lacks it substatially."
I support free software, as I have said numerous times, I think its great. BUT, my concerns are financial and market based. Software development is not free (as in beer), which means their must be a profit model for free software (as in speach). We can argue market trends and various profit models, but I think that is beyond the scope of this discussion. Sufice it to say that the free market will demand a blend of free and non-free software packages.
If you want to attack my views and challange my opinion, feel free. But I would appreciate it if you would give me the same respect I give to you.
Freedom is subjective. Who's freedom are you placing at the top? The users? If the users get all their software "free" (as in beer AND speach), the the market for software development will shrink as their is less money moving into development. A shrinking market LIMITS users' selection of options which definately reduces their Freedom.
Freedom for the original coders limits the freedom of derivative coders.
Freedom for the derivative coders limits the freedom of the original coders.
I'm not saying that Free (as in beer OR speach) is bad, I am saying that any SINGLE solution (non-free or free) is bad. The market will demand some of each and life will continue.
You really need to be more clear about whay YOU mean by Free. Who's freedom are you fighting for? If you are fighting for the USER's freedom, the best option is to allow the free market to do its job and create a blend of software.
Yes, a college graduate with no experience should expect to get paid on the bottom end of the pay scale for their job when the start out. Now, it that person never renegotiates his or her contract, and always just accepts what is offered, then yes, they will make exactly that.
Me personally, I'm up a little over $25k/year above what I was making when I first hit the public sector (former military). Had I stayed out east and kept my security clearance, I would likely be significantly higher then that. But I like the simple and low cost life of the mid-west.;)
People can scream about the bottom falling out of IT all they want, but I keep seeing more and more positions opening for internal network support, network admin, linux knowledgable people, business and web application developers.
Absolutely, and significantly more than software deserves freedom.
"Remember, saying you don't want all software to be Free Software is like saying you don't want all humans to have freedom (I'm excluding criminals doing time for obvious reasons)."
Just the opposite. If all software is free (as in beer) then software developers are NOT free. Free (as in speach) software can give some software developers MORE freedom while giving other developers LESS freedom. The most Free (as in speach/beer) is to allow the free market to balance out the different options. Open Source, Free (as in beer), Free (as in speach), Licensed source, closed source, what ever. The free market will decide which projects will succed based on their merrits and marketing. Just like argueing the future of fuel for automobiles (hydrogen, ethanol, biodiesel, hybrid, full electric, etc..), there is no single answer that is always correct. There is a best tool for the situation, and it will take a combination of ALL solutions to keep moving forward.
Just because I don't want all solutions to be free (as in beer or speach) doesn't mean I don't want ANY solutions to be free (as in beer or speach)
"Free Software, contrary to what you seem to believe"
I made no comment on Free Software. I only stated (as we appear to agree on) that the software itself has no desire to be free.
I think Free Software is neat. I think it is going to play a continued roll in the market of software development. I don't think, nor do I want all software to become free software.
The point I was trying to specificly make is that a company absolutely CAN buy Open Source. Not to be confused with Free Software.
You are correct, the USCB unemployment rate is low, but that doesn't mean there is a mass shortage of jobs in the IT field. Hell, I'm still sitting here short two.Net developers. One of which is a JUNIOR LEVEL POSITION. We're interviewing our 3rd recent (about to) college grad today. If you are trainable, and professional, there are many doors open for you. I've been on the other side, sucking on unemployement after the.Com blow out. And even then, the only reason I was on unemployment was because of my own laziness. When I got close to the end of my benefits, I had no problem finding a job once I was actually puting an effort into it.
If the machine was broken, it was broken for everyone. Online applications is the norm at this point, and you'd have to have a really solid position to challenge the company in court. Maybe if you were blind and their online application was a non-standards compliant web page...
Even then, do you really want to work for a company that you had to sue to get a job? Do you think they really want you on staff if they are forced to hire you on due to a lawsuit?
And what the hell are you talking about it being hard to find a job? The nation wide unemployment rate is around 5%, there are a LOT of jobs out there. Likely even jobs that you are qualified for. But YOU have to find them.
Why can't a company buy an open source project? Bring the developers on board, retain controlling rights, enforce licensing, etc... All OS means is that the code is published. Contrary to (supposed) popular believe, software, in and of itself, has no desire to be 'free.'
Slashdot Mirror
on [b]FREE[/b] software.
-Rick
"I just don't see how this could be good."
;)
I look at it as just the opposite. I was a geek in grade school. Big time. My friends and I all got picked on, teased, harassed, and abused. It wasn't until we got into high school where we realised there were a bunch of people getting picked on, and that we could work together to over come the bullying. When someone was harassed in high school, we would stick up for them. It's a lot harder for a bully to pick on a geek if they are surrounded by 4 other geeks. Combat boots and trench coats don't hurt either
By my senior year the Geeks and the Hessians (for-mentioned combat boot/trench coat wearing people as they were known in my school) had a pretty smooth life. We had numbers and strong men enough to keep the jocks at bay, the hicks had lost their primary leadership the year before, and the self proclaimed 'wiggers' (truly a retarded title for a social cliche) were all show.
Any ways, any movie that promotes geeks, nerds, and other social out-casts to unite and deter bullying (preferably non-violently) in my book is a great thing.
-Rick
Agreed. The page is poorly written, boring, and very smoothed over, but there are links and references to many of the objections. The article author appears to be mad that his anti-WM statements were removed from the Wiki page.
Not that I am pro-WM, I think they have a couple of ethical problems with their employment practices. But I think the wiki article is a proper wiki article.
-Rick
Yeah, but for $30 you can get a 5 star suit. For $4 you can have a steak and lobster dinner. For $80 take a private charter boat out for a tour.
-Rick
Where do you think the money for our national debt comes from? China has over $260bil in US Treasury bonds. Japan has even more. And a LOT of this deficite spending activity has been on Bush's plate. When Clinton left office the debt was $5.6tril, and grew $20bil hist last year (compared to $400bil his first year). Right now the debt is estimated at $8.3tril. Almost 3 trillion dollars spent in 5 years... crazy.
-Rick
From the article on NEC being pirated: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/27/business/ne c.php
"After a visit to the Microsoft headquarters in Seattle on April 18, Hu said the protection of intellectual property was crucial for China's future."
A quick visit to old Billy-boy, a squak about IP protection, and a $900m deal? Interesting.
-Rick
Agreed. Intel's GROWTH is falling behind AMD's growth. Intel still has a firm grip on the market. Intel still sold more chips then AMD. Intel is only falling behind their previous performance. Which as mentioned in TFA, is still within their historical variance.
-Rick
So true, I run a manual scan for spyware and virus's maybe once every few months. I haven't seen anything on my computer in the last 2 years because of responsible surfing habbits.
This article is nothing more then a company trying to sell you something by creating a bogus "test" that will show you why you need their product.
-Rick
Actually, He is a She...
-Rick
True, I should have sited that, but I was on my way out of work. If I get a chance later tonight I'll see if I can't find supporting (or contradictory!) evidence.
-Rick
"We randomly assigned 100 male undergraduates aged 18-21 to play a game relatively high in violence, Grand Theft Auto III, or a game relatively low in violence, The Simpsons: Hit and Run."
So they used 100 guys 18-21, likely most of which were from one geographic area. They also had no control group, so there is no way to prove that Gamers are any different than Non-Gamers, only that 18-21yr old males who play these games have some difference.
"Those study participants who played Grand Theft Auto III had greater increases in diastolic blood pressure from a baseline rest period to gameplay in comparison to participants who played The Simpsons."
Which is much more likely based on the fact that GTA has much more realism and realistic punishments. Death and prison register in our minds as real possible penalties. Death of a cartoon figure registers as little more then a Saturday morning cartoon with little association.
"After gameplay, GTA III players had more negative feelings, more uncooperative behavior, and thought that using alcohol and marijuana was less harmful to their health than players of The Simpsons."
other then being subjective and with out statistical backing, this is a great result. With only 100 people in the pool, any findings could be easily skewed by a few outliers. Also, there is nothing that states the pool sizes. So if the GTA pool had 65 participants and the TS pool had 35, it would be factual to say that the GTA group had more negative feelings. Also, the result is poorly worded, I highly doubt that everyone in the GTA group thought that "using alcohol and marijuana was less harmful to their health." It is more likely that GTP players were "more likely to think that using alcohol and marijuana was less harmful to their health."
"Among those people who grew up in more violent homes and communities... Among those people who grew up in more violent communities..."
So now, out of 100 people they are making conclusions for the entire male 18-21 gaming community based on a hand full of people. Assuming a third of the participants grew up in a violent house hold, another third in a violent community, and the final third grew up in Mayberry, and then each of these groups was evenly distributed between GTA and TS, you're looking at 16 people to base your research off of.
"Consistent with the results of many other people's research"
None of which appears to be sited.
With no statistics posted, this should outright be tossed as a valueless publication. And judging by their claims and process, any statistically substantial findings they made are most likely due to outliers skewing the results.
-Rick
All jokes aside, Regular DVDs are going to be the reigning king for a while to come. Both formats will have a hard time gaining wide spread acceptance as long as the competitor is out there. Especially since in the movie arena, neither has any current offerings that provide consumers with a large tangible advantage over regular DVDs. Movies @ 1024i are pretty, but they are not hundreds of dollars prettier then Movies @ 480p (err what ever EDTV/DVDs are recorded at).
-Rick
That is actually one of my concerns as a (PC) game modder. A lot of 3rd party add-ons for video games live by reading the game's memory. Depending on how this new feature operates, it could block off an entire array of 3rd party modifications to games.
-Rick
The Cell processor has much wider market desires then just the PS3. It is likely that the PS3 will not take this feature as an advantage, but the feature will be there for Linux based Cell Processor servers. In those kinds of system, memory protection can be extremely important.
-Rick
Step 1: Move out of mother's basement ...
Step 2:
Step 3: Get laid
-Rick
2 tickets to an evening showing of the latest movie: $17.00. Bucket of popcorn and soda: $6.00. Gas to drive to theater and back (in new 44mpg car) $3.00. Cost of babysitter: $0.00 (Thanks to Grandma!). Total cost: $26.00
New released DVD: $20.00. 2-liter soda and popcorn: $5.00. Gas: $0.00 (Bestbuy on route home). Babysitter: $0.00. Total Cost: $25.00
Not to mention at home we can pause the movie if we need to get up. And if we do like the movie, we can watch it again.
All in all, $20.00 doesn't seem like that bad of a deal to me. At $1.50 a movie, they have to be looking at 10 million sales to GROSS the cost of a bargin basement movie. Most likely they'll need close to 40 million sales at $1.50 just to cover the cost of the movie and distrobution. And that's just for a $15mil movie. Imagine trying to turn a profit off of a AAA title!
And we're not talking about Jimbo in his dorm room downloading a song, we're talking about companies that rip and re-press DVDs for resale and mass market distrobution. Nah, the primary issues are 1) copy right infringement. And 2) the artificially low value of Chinesse currency.
-Rick
"Who's talking about a _single_ solution?"
... coders limits the freedom of ... coders.] Completely bogus statement."
I am. I have been this whole time. To quote myself: "I think Free Software is neat. I think it is going to play a continued roll in the market of software development. I don't think, nor do I want all software to become free software."
"You have many desktop environments to choose from (GNOME and KDE being the most popular right now), many MTA servers (email), office suites, MUA (email clients) etc... etc..."
I'm not talking about a single system. I'm talking about a single total solution. as in ALL SOFTWARE. Not all desktop environment, not all MTA servers, not all office suits. I mean ALL software. All of those you listed and the thousands of other field. The Market will determine to correct combination of Free and non-Free software. Neither one is the absolute correct answer.
"Not it's not. Not when it's as clearly defined as the Free Software definition."
That is the definition of "Free Software", not to beconfused with FREEDOM, which believe it or not, expands beyond the scope of software. FREEDOM is extremely subjective. Free Software is more clearly defined, but still has subjective points.
"[Freedom for the
Absolutely not. License your Free software under GPL3. GPL3 gives you the Freedom of some control over your code. GPL3 removes the Freedom of derivative programmers to incorporate your code into (or incorperate into your code) a DRM system. License under GPL2 and the derivative coders have more freedom, and you have less. IMO - In order to be truely free (as in free speach), the derivative programmers need to have exactly the same rights as the original coder. If that means wrapping a DRM in it, shrink wrapping a box and selling it retail, so be it.
"Any proprietary software automatically shrinks the market to one entity."
Now that is a completely bogus statement. Office is proprietary, but OO exists, and numerous other proprietary office apps existed before it. Windows is proprietary but Apple, Linux, Unix, BSD and others (both proprietary and not) continue to exist. IE is proprietary, but FF flurishes. Often proprietary systems are the only system available in a market segment, but that has more to do with the costs of software development, and the market than with wether the system is proprietary or not.
"There's one person in this discussion who's being deliberately pretending to "support Free Software but..." and that's who is in need of a clear dosage of clarity for he lacks it substatially."
I support free software, as I have said numerous times, I think its great. BUT, my concerns are financial and market based. Software development is not free (as in beer), which means their must be a profit model for free software (as in speach). We can argue market trends and various profit models, but I think that is beyond the scope of this discussion. Sufice it to say that the free market will demand a blend of free and non-free software packages.
If you want to attack my views and challange my opinion, feel free. But I would appreciate it if you would give me the same respect I give to you.
-Rick
Freedom is subjective. Who's freedom are you placing at the top? The users? If the users get all their software "free" (as in beer AND speach), the the market for software development will shrink as their is less money moving into development. A shrinking market LIMITS users' selection of options which definately reduces their Freedom.
Freedom for the original coders limits the freedom of derivative coders.
Freedom for the derivative coders limits the freedom of the original coders.
I'm not saying that Free (as in beer OR speach) is bad, I am saying that any SINGLE solution (non-free or free) is bad. The market will demand some of each and life will continue.
You really need to be more clear about whay YOU mean by Free. Who's freedom are you fighting for? If you are fighting for the USER's freedom, the best option is to allow the free market to do its job and create a blend of software.
-Rick
Man do I love that song!
-Rick
Yes, a college graduate with no experience should expect to get paid on the bottom end of the pay scale for their job when the start out. Now, it that person never renegotiates his or her contract, and always just accepts what is offered, then yes, they will make exactly that.
;)
Me personally, I'm up a little over $25k/year above what I was making when I first hit the public sector (former military). Had I stayed out east and kept my security clearance, I would likely be significantly higher then that. But I like the simple and low cost life of the mid-west.
People can scream about the bottom falling out of IT all they want, but I keep seeing more and more positions opening for internal network support, network admin, linux knowledgable people, business and web application developers.
-Rick
"Why do you think people don't deserve freedom?"
Absolutely, and significantly more than software deserves freedom.
"Remember, saying you don't want all software to be Free Software is like saying you don't want all humans to have freedom (I'm excluding criminals doing time for obvious reasons)."
Just the opposite. If all software is free (as in beer) then software developers are NOT free. Free (as in speach) software can give some software developers MORE freedom while giving other developers LESS freedom. The most Free (as in speach/beer) is to allow the free market to balance out the different options. Open Source, Free (as in beer), Free (as in speach), Licensed source, closed source, what ever. The free market will decide which projects will succed based on their merrits and marketing. Just like argueing the future of fuel for automobiles (hydrogen, ethanol, biodiesel, hybrid, full electric, etc..), there is no single answer that is always correct. There is a best tool for the situation, and it will take a combination of ALL solutions to keep moving forward.
Just because I don't want all solutions to be free (as in beer or speach) doesn't mean I don't want ANY solutions to be free (as in beer or speach)
-Rick
"Free Software, contrary to what you seem to believe"
I made no comment on Free Software. I only stated (as we appear to agree on) that the software itself has no desire to be free.
I think Free Software is neat. I think it is going to play a continued roll in the market of software development. I don't think, nor do I want all software to become free software.
The point I was trying to specificly make is that a company absolutely CAN buy Open Source. Not to be confused with Free Software.
-Rick
You are correct, the USCB unemployment rate is low, but that doesn't mean there is a mass shortage of jobs in the IT field. Hell, I'm still sitting here short two .Net developers. One of which is a JUNIOR LEVEL POSITION. We're interviewing our 3rd recent (about to) college grad today. If you are trainable, and professional, there are many doors open for you. I've been on the other side, sucking on unemployement after the .Com blow out. And even then, the only reason I was on unemployment was because of my own laziness. When I got close to the end of my benefits, I had no problem finding a job once I was actually puting an effort into it.
-Rick
If the machine was broken, it was broken for everyone. Online applications is the norm at this point, and you'd have to have a really solid position to challenge the company in court. Maybe if you were blind and their online application was a non-standards compliant web page...
Even then, do you really want to work for a company that you had to sue to get a job? Do you think they really want you on staff if they are forced to hire you on due to a lawsuit?
And what the hell are you talking about it being hard to find a job? The nation wide unemployment rate is around 5%, there are a LOT of jobs out there. Likely even jobs that you are qualified for. But YOU have to find them.
-Rick
Why can't a company buy an open source project? Bring the developers on board, retain controlling rights, enforce licensing, etc... All OS means is that the code is published. Contrary to (supposed) popular believe, software, in and of itself, has no desire to be 'free.'
-Rick