Let the biologists principally write the biology articles with you on that one...
and let the pedophiles write about pedophilia....not at all with you on this one...
You can only understand - and therefore only fairly reject - something once you've heard it defended....or this. You don't always need to hear something defended to understand it, you can look at the effect on the victim. There is a huge difference between listening to some-one in their area of expertise and listening to a rapist or pedophile justify their crimes.
We human beings need stress reduction. Many of us choose to drink a moderate amount to do so.
And there are also those of us who never use it for stress reduction, but do use it to celebrate! I like a quote I heard from a pastor one day "Jesus turned water into wine, and evangelical christians have been trying to turn it back ever since"
1. Communism relies on authoritarian control, fear motivation.
and
2. Under communism, you have no copyrights (or any other sort of rights) to be generous with, and your ideals had better be the parties ideals or shut up.
Since every communist government has been authoritarian, rising to power through violence (as taught by Marx) and communism abolishes personal property (on which copyrights are based), then I stand by my statement that communism and Free software are based on fundamentally opposed ideals. You refered to Free software as the abdication of copyright, which it is not. You seem to be thinking of public domain. Regarding Free Software "You clearly don't understand it and haven't taken any steps to educate yourself about it."
Regarding my knowledge of communism, Marx and Engels wrote in the communist manifesto "It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the spectre of communism with a manifesto of the party itself."
Since then I have familiarised myself with what Marx called "their views, their aims, their tendencies", I think I have taken reasonable steps to educate myself. I have also read books by people who have lived under communism.
In any case, Free software relies on having property rights, in particular copyrights, which by definition, is not communism.
Note the statement "without violating the software's copyright protection." Apparently the Free Software Foundation disagrees with you about Free Software. The US Federal Court too. Go figure.
...but if you're happy to conflate the dictatorial cults of personality of the so-called communist countries with the works of Marx (which you've clearly never read), feel free.
Communism is as communism does. I have not read books by Marx, but I did read the communist manifesto, which is entirely consistent with the actions of the "so-called communist countries", and if I understand correctly, co-authored by Marx.
Free software relies on copyright, a concept inseparable from personal profit motivation.
Communism relies on authoritarian control, fear motivation.
Free software relies on the generosity/ideals of the copyright holder
Under communism, you have no copyrights (or any other sort of rights) to be generous with, and your ideals had better be the parties ideals or shut up.
Essentially, Free software is a social responsibility ethic within a free enterprise structure. It would never have originated under communism IMO as the fundamental concepts are opposed.
Any new idea is asked two questions.
The first is asked when its weak: WHAT KIND OF AN IDEA ARE YOU?
Are you the kind that compromises, does deals, accommodates itself to society, aims to find a niche, to survive; or are you the cussed, bloody-minded, ramrod-backed type of damnfool notion that would rather break than sway with the breeze? The kind that will almost certainly, ninety-nine times out of hundred, be smashed to bits; but, the 100th time, will change the world.......
[the second questions is] WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU WIN?...
Idealists don't understand compromisers, compromisers don't understand idealists. Idealists don't live very harmoniously in the world, compromisers don't change the world. Stallman decided to go for change. You say rigidity and stubborness, others say integrity and persistence.
I think it's one of those cases where 'it takes all types'.
Yup. A judge is right if he or she goes with the consensus opinion of Slashdot. If they disagree, they must be wrong.
That's like saying to someone "You always think you're right", to which the logical reply is "Of course, if I didn't think I was right, I'd change my mind"
To have an opinion means that you think people who disagree with it are wrong. You may accept the possibility you are wrong, and be open to learning, but you will live as if you are right until you are convinced otherwise. Then you will change your mind, and go on as if you are right, thinking people who disagree with you are wrong.
While you are correct to an extent, the article was about how to avoid being outsourced, not how to stay comfortable doing what you like. Every time you apply for a job, ask for a raise, want time off etc, etc, you are in a way 'selling' the other person on the idea of what you want them to do. There is a strong likelyhood that the person making the desicion (a) doesn't understand your technical abilities. (b) can (or thinks they can) get them cheaper elsewhere. Management skills are something they will likely understand better, so adds value to your proposition (hire me, keep hiring me, pay me more, etc).
Since you are going to sell (even if it's only your services as an employee) it makes sense to do it well rather than poorly. My job is not in sales, but I have no doubt that my training/experience in sales is quite beneficial to me in my job. It would work similarly with management skills I'm sure.
Perhaps you could benefit from reading the communist manifesto. Communism fails because stealing and killing are central to its purpose. Stealing and killing occur in all societies, but communism is based on stealing and killing.
From the article: The NSW Minister for Commerce, John Della Bosca, on Monday announced -- after a six-month tender evaluation process -- 11 companies would be offered positions on the panel. Companies which made the cut included CSC, Dell, Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Novell, Red Hat, Sol1, Starcom, Sun Microsystems and System Integration Services.
The agreement was subject to "final negotiations", but was not just an agreement to supply one agency, as one comment stated, it makes them an 'approved supplier' for all NSW government agencies, ie: no tender process required to purchase.
They are replacing manufacturing (per copy) with encoding (once?), storage in warehouse with storage on a server, trucks with bandwidth and packaging (for each copy) with "clients to facilitate the downloads" (write once + maintain)
There is no way the cost to deliver a download service should equal cost of physical delivery, IMO
First: If you can't afford to buy your software, you might reconsider whether you should be calling yourself a "good business woman" - just a thought.
Second: http://www.us.debian.org/http://centos.org/ (RedHat clone). Both tested, stable and production ready. Many others, use a search engine. I'm sure your IT Consultant can tell you how. However, if your IT Consultant told you there are no production Free/Open Source operating systems, you need to find an honest one.
overpowerful unions are just as bad as overpowerful anything else, corrupt unions are just as bad as corrupt anything else. I'm not a huge union fan, but I think most of the wealthy countries have a union movement (US, UK, Aust... not sure about other countries).
For our consuption based economies, it is essential to have workers (majority of the population) who are paid well enough to buy the goods. China's economy could never have risen via sales to their own poorly paid workforce. Many of them, even now, could not afford to buy the goods they make.
To have a fair comparison, you would need to ask Torvalds what he would do with all the money if he had $XX Billion dollars.
Not really. Try comparing what they would do if they had some software: give it freely, so that others can use it for production, or sell it and give some of the profits.
We've all heard "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, you feed him for a lifetime. Gates gives away fish, Torvalds gives away nets.
With anything that is mass produced, first comes quantity. When the demand for quantity is satisfied, then comes quality. What you are seeing here is a higher quality of stupidity than you're used to. It's a natural progression.
they are distributing binaries (on the device), and the source code they published is not the source used to compile the binaries, therefore not useful for bugfixing etc, and not GPL compliant.
That they have stated that bypassing region encoding != breaching copyright could well stand. Also the fact that we will have fair use rights will very likely cause exceptions to the changes are due in 1 January 2007, due to having "actual or likely adverse effect on non-infringing use." These are the new laws.
Slashdot Mirror
Let the biologists principally write the biology articles with you on that one...
...
and let the pedophiles write about pedophilia....not at all with you on this one
You can only understand - and therefore only fairly reject - something once you've heard it defended....or this. You don't always need to hear something defended to understand it, you can look at the effect on the victim. There is a huge difference between listening to some-one in their area of expertise and listening to a rapist or pedophile justify their crimes.
We human beings need stress reduction. Many of us choose to drink a moderate amount to do so.
And there are also those of us who never use it for stress reduction, but do use it to celebrate! I like a quote I heard from a pastor one day "Jesus turned water into wine, and evangelical christians have been trying to turn it back ever since"
I made two comments on it:
1. Communism relies on authoritarian control, fear motivation.
and
2. Under communism, you have no copyrights (or any other sort of rights) to be generous with, and your ideals had better be the parties ideals or shut up.
Since every communist government has been authoritarian, rising to power through violence (as taught by Marx) and communism abolishes personal property (on which copyrights are based), then I stand by my statement that communism and Free software are based on fundamentally opposed ideals. You refered to Free software as the abdication of copyright, which it is not. You seem to be thinking of public domain. Regarding Free Software "You clearly don't understand it and haven't taken any steps to educate yourself about it."
Regarding my knowledge of communism, Marx and Engels wrote in the communist manifesto "It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the spectre of communism with a manifesto of the party itself."
Since then I have familiarised myself with what Marx called "their views, their aims, their tendencies", I think I have taken reasonable steps to educate myself. I have also read books by people who have lived under communism.
In any case, Free software relies on having property rights, in particular copyrights, which by definition, is not communism.
I see you have no further defense of communism.
Wrong. Free software is, in fact, more or less the abdication of copyright.
...but if you're happy to conflate the dictatorial cults of personality of the so-called communist countries with the works of Marx (which you've clearly never read), feel free.
No, that's public domain. I'm sure you can find out the difference yourself if you do some research. The Free Software Foundation defend their copyrights. You could benefit from reading their web page "On Monday, a US Federal Court Judge dismissed Daniel Wallace's case saying "[The GPL] acts as a means by which certain software may be copied, modified and redistributed without violating the software's copyright protection."
Note the statement "without violating the software's copyright protection." Apparently the Free Software Foundation disagrees with you about Free Software. The US Federal Court too. Go figure.
Communism is as communism does. I have not read books by Marx, but I did read the communist manifesto, which is entirely consistent with the actions of the "so-called communist countries", and if I understand correctly, co-authored by Marx.
Free software relies on copyright, a concept inseparable from personal profit motivation.
Communism relies on authoritarian control, fear motivation.
Free software relies on the generosity/ideals of the copyright holder
Under communism, you have no copyrights (or any other sort of rights) to be generous with, and your ideals had better be the parties ideals or shut up.
Essentially, Free software is a social responsibility ethic within a free enterprise structure. It would never have originated under communism IMO as the fundamental concepts are opposed.
Perhpas a quote from "The Satanic Verses" taken from this page: http://justzipit.blogspot.com/ would explain it best.
......
[the second questions is] WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU WIN? ...
Any new idea is asked two questions. The first is asked when its weak: WHAT KIND OF AN IDEA ARE YOU? Are you the kind that compromises, does deals, accommodates itself to society, aims to find a niche, to survive; or are you the cussed, bloody-minded, ramrod-backed type of damnfool notion that would rather break than sway with the breeze? The kind that will almost certainly, ninety-nine times out of hundred, be smashed to bits; but, the 100th time, will change the world.
Idealists don't understand compromisers, compromisers don't understand idealists. Idealists don't live very harmoniously in the world, compromisers don't change the world. Stallman decided to go for change. You say rigidity and stubborness, others say integrity and persistence. I think it's one of those cases where 'it takes all types'.
If the amount was not enough to force compliance with the orders, wouldn't it be rather a waste of time?
Yup. A judge is right if he or she goes with the consensus opinion of Slashdot. If they disagree, they must be wrong.
That's like saying to someone "You always think you're right", to which the logical reply is "Of course, if I didn't think I was right, I'd change my mind"
To have an opinion means that you think people who disagree with it are wrong. You may accept the possibility you are wrong, and be open to learning, but you will live as if you are right until you are convinced otherwise. Then you will change your mind, and go on as if you are right, thinking people who disagree with you are wrong.
While you are correct to an extent, the article was about how to avoid being outsourced, not how to stay comfortable doing what you like. Every time you apply for a job, ask for a raise, want time off etc, etc, you are in a way 'selling' the other person on the idea of what you want them to do. There is a strong likelyhood that the person making the desicion (a) doesn't understand your technical abilities. (b) can (or thinks they can) get them cheaper elsewhere. Management skills are something they will likely understand better, so adds value to your proposition (hire me, keep hiring me, pay me more, etc).
Since you are going to sell (even if it's only your services as an employee) it makes sense to do it well rather than poorly. My job is not in sales, but I have no doubt that my training/experience in sales is quite beneficial to me in my job. It would work similarly with management skills I'm sure.
Perhaps you could benefit from reading the communist manifesto. Communism fails because stealing and killing are central to its purpose. Stealing and killing occur in all societies, but communism is based on stealing and killing.
zdnet reported it last year in April.
From the article: The NSW Minister for Commerce, John Della Bosca, on Monday announced -- after a six-month tender evaluation process -- 11 companies would be offered positions on the panel. Companies which made the cut included CSC, Dell, Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Novell, Red Hat, Sol1, Starcom, Sun Microsystems and System Integration Services.
The agreement was subject to "final negotiations", but was not just an agreement to supply one agency, as one comment stated, it makes them an 'approved supplier' for all NSW government agencies, ie: no tender process required to purchase.
They are replacing manufacturing (per copy) with encoding (once?), storage in warehouse with storage on a server, trucks with bandwidth and packaging (for each copy) with "clients to facilitate the downloads" (write once + maintain)
There is no way the cost to deliver a download service should equal cost of physical delivery, IMO
So that's how he got the honorary knighthood from the Queen.
First: If you can't afford to buy your software, you might reconsider whether you should be calling yourself a "good business woman" - just a thought.
Second: http://www.us.debian.org/ http://centos.org/ (RedHat clone). Both tested, stable and production ready. Many others, use a search engine. I'm sure your IT Consultant can tell you how. However, if your IT Consultant told you there are no production Free/Open Source operating systems, you need to find an honest one.
overpowerful unions are just as bad as overpowerful anything else, corrupt unions are just as bad as corrupt anything else. I'm not a huge union fan, but I think most of the wealthy countries have a union movement (US, UK, Aust... not sure about other countries).
For our consuption based economies, it is essential to have workers (majority of the population) who are paid well enough to buy the goods. China's economy could never have risen via sales to their own poorly paid workforce. Many of them, even now, could not afford to buy the goods they make.
"I don't want just... money. Money's not enough." could be understood to mean "We want all the money we can get AND ..."
shouldn't bother the shareholders much.
perhaps he's being affected by an NDA
To have a fair comparison, you would need to ask Torvalds what he would do with all the money if he had $XX Billion dollars.
Not really. Try comparing what they would do if they had some software: give it freely, so that others can use it for production, or sell it and give some of the profits.
We've all heard "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, you feed him for a lifetime. Gates gives away fish, Torvalds gives away nets.
99.9% of chinese folks don't even consider themselves repressed
And you know this how?
Government statistics.
Now you know how users of other browsers feel when going to pages that urge them to use IE.
What the hell kind of stupidity is going on here?
With anything that is mass produced, first comes quantity. When the demand for quantity is satisfied, then comes quality. What you are seeing here is a higher quality of stupidity than you're used to. It's a natural progression.
Hope this helps.
Nobody compelled them to use GPL software. Since they chose to they have to comply with the GPL for that code.
they are distributing binaries (on the device), and the source code they published is not the source used to compile the binaries, therefore not useful for bugfixing etc, and not GPL compliant.
That they have stated that bypassing region encoding != breaching copyright could well stand. Also the fact that we will have fair use rights will very likely cause exceptions to the changes are due in 1 January 2007, due to having "actual or likely adverse effect on non-infringing use." These are the new laws.
In addition to this, the courts apparent desire to protect the rights of consumers ("Such activity discouraged competition and advanced the rights of Copyright owners, to the detriment of Copyright users.") will likely continue to influence the way they interpret the law.