I wouldn't go to anything organised by a right-wing host (for obviously demagogic reasons). It seems the muslims in your area don't have a reason to go either. Well done.
Christianity, in general, supports the idea of microevolution
Christianity, in general, does not oppose the theory of evolution. (Note: 2nd link does not point to a text on evolution by the German Lutheran Church specifically, but states, "The problems of genetic engineering in the non-human sphere arise first of all from the speed of the developments which are taking place; as distinct from the slowly progressing evolution of life the changes brought about by genetic engineering and its world-wide application are taking place relatively quickly". I couldn't find a more on-topic link in English, but the German Lutheran Church has repeatedly stated that they don't see a problem with evolution)
On a global scale, only fringe parts of Christianity deny evolution, it's just that they seem to have overtaken the US.
which has been governed by radical priests for too long
Well, had the CIA not overthrown the nascent Iranian democracy and replaced it with a brutal totalitarian regime, the mad priests would probably not have gotten a foothold.
But we can't have that, can we? How else would the US justify their invasions in oil-rich countries.
religion has asked science to help solve at least one of its mysteries
In fact the Vatican employs more than 30 scientists for the examination of claims of miracles. To make someone a saint of the catholic church, you need to provide evidence of a miracle, and in most cases the Vatican tries to make sure that there is in fact no reasonable scientific explanation for the occurrence, at least from their point of view.
Places of pilgrimige also usually need a miracle that the Vatican will examine.
I always thought that must be the greatest job: X-Files for real (or what the catholic church believes it to be)
It's also easy when people pay for your flights and accommodation around the world so you can tell them why they should live according to your rules.
Hey AC, I think you didn't understand. The thing is, RMS lived by his principles when it meant giving up a good job at MIT and living in a container on the campus, embarking on the project of writing a free Unix replacement. Therefore, accusing him of "it's easy when" is incorrect.
Two efforts to do pretty much what you describe, one for Firefly and one for Enterprise, have recently failed to get anywhere near the scale of popular support
So, in this world RMS envisions, there might be no Enterprise and Firefly. Big loss. See, I'm a rather big Enterprise fan, but I didn't care. It's TV, I have no real connection to it - if they feed it to me, I'm likely to be a good citizen and watch it, but if not, then not.
Instead, I have spent my entertainment money mostly locally. Yes, the world would be very different without copyrights, but there's no proof it would be worse.
Since he has problems with a few of the Creative Commons compatible licenses, they must all be rejected in his mindset.
Did you RTFA? He explicitly says that some CC licenses are free and he agrees with them, and some are not and he doesn't. He also says that it makes no sense to talk about "the CC licenses" because they are more different than alike.
He makes this clear distinction, so your insinuation that he lumps them together is incorrect.
Then he goes on to explain that because people lump them together, he can't get this differentiation across, and thus feels himself "constrained" to reject them all.
This is a purely tactical maneuver, and is not a rejection of the free CC licenses as such.
Re a.out -> ELF and similar ancient stories. What can I say, you have a point. But then, every fricking DOS app needed its own printer driver, but do you hit WinXP over the head because of that?
there have certainly been library patches for freeware unix systems that have required significant rebuilding-from-sources, or installing-over your machine with a newer vendor supplied binary set.
Certainly "there have been". Probably on some special-case distro with 50 users. But I still haven't seen such a thing in 9 years usage mostly on Debian, but earlier also RH and SuSE. Maybe with the exception of X, but that also only just required a rebuild of all of X, and not applications using it. Anyway, X.org 7.0 gets rid of that too. So if you want to argue not for argument's sake, at least one of these horrible examples would be helpful.
Do you disagree and suggest that there are no pain points around patch management and excessive rebuilding/redeploying on linux, or are you arguing just for arguments sake?
Again such a broad statement that makes sure you are right. Plus you open a false dichotomy with using "and" in "Do you disagree and suggest that there are no pain points".
First of all, I neither agree or disagree at this point because as I repeatedly said, I haven't encountered such and still wait for your examples. Suggesting that there are no pain points would by itself however not make your allegations of patch hell correct.
And of course there are pain points, suggesting otherwise would be moronic. Everything has pain points. The question is how they are dealt with and what tools are provided. Good distros seem to do both, at least until you provide examples to the contrary: just look at the toolset Debian provides for sitewide updates, and into their update policy for stable releases, that ensures as much as possible that behavior does not change.
If I compare that to the 100 MB service packs of Windows we have to deploy at our organisation (the actual applications not even included, which all have their own incompatible mechanisms because Windows lacks a framework they can use), which touch god-knows-what and break the other, I know which system features "excessive rebuilding/redeploying". I don't know if Windows actually has a deployment mechanism for patches, only that the guys in our IT felt the need to purchase something extra (Altiris).
In any case, a much better example of linux shared library hell would be the earlier GTK libraries, where apps often required mutually incompatible versions of GTK source distributions.
Do you even know what you are talking about? First of all, the shared library system in GNU/Linux distros ensures that security fixes to libs actually reach the apps, which is a good thing in my book. Then, what's the problem? Again, I don't think I have seen this in Debian (and I used Gnome since, what, 0.35?). Then, it's a good thing to be able to accomodate incompatible versions of libs and have apps use the right one. Much better at least than Window's "solution" of last one wins.
linux users put up with recompiling everyhing if the fix "requires" it
Not all linux users are on gentoo. When was the last time you recompiled your entire system because of glibc fixes? I haven't had to do that once in 9 years of using GNU/linux.
except that windows users expect software to keep running no matter what
Advocating violence on the topic of homosexuality? Like, "let's go bash some straights?" Or advocating violence in other contexts, like "we should bomb the fuck out of Iraq"? Because, you know, they are just normal people.
Letting John marry Bob because "he loves him" and not letting M. Jackson love one of his kids even though "they love each other" means an inequality within the law.
WTF? Letting a grown-up soldier drive a tank after special training but not allowing it for 5-year olds means an inequality within the law? John and Bob are consenting adults, Jackson's alleged kids aren't. Spot the difference?
Consenting adults should have the right to do whatever they please that harms none other.
- Discriminating against homosexuals is offensive in itself, it's not reasonable to be offensive in order to prevent being potentially offensive - There is an infinite amount of things that people are potentially offended by. Not least of which, killing things for xp. But they single out this issue.
Don't call it marriage then or something. Remember for a moment that even in a family there are not only kids but also parents that have needs. The same is true for gay couples even in the absence of children.
Like, if you live in an apartment for 30 years together with your partner and he dies, you shouldn't be evicted over night because you are not mentioned on the lease. If your partner has an accident and the decision needs to be made if machines shall be turned off, it should be yours, not his parents' who might not have talked to him in 20 years. Think of pensions, etc.
Marriage takes care of all this in a simple package, but so can other contracts. To deny that is utter malignance.
Not true. Exactly the people that buy the content are affected.
If I as a regular customer buy a DRM'ed CD, I can't easily make a copy for my car. If I am a pirate, it's a non-issue to record a non-DRM CD over the analog out of the DRM'ed one, and people copying/buying from the pirate are not restricted either.
Yes, you have. But the thing is that English spell checkers will mark that wrong, and it's not evidently clear from the word "bliters" what you mean. Meanwhile, "Älterzähne" clearly means what it means, because it is composed of the words "alt" (old)/"Älter" (elder) and "Zähne" pl of "Zahn" (tooth).
No. This only means that German spellcheckers suck. Being a German speaker myself who uses spellcheckers in my job, I can attest to that the only thing they (well, MS's, I just realize I know no others) catch are typos. They will miss each and every meaningless word that happens to be built from meaningful words. And if you write an actually existing compound word that they don't know, they will suggest all kinds of meaningless compounds they pull from god knows where.
What good is that, and why should it prove anything except maybe how little we actually know about language.
Tell me about it:) In this topic I exchanged several posts with Krach42 who seems very knowledgeable on the subject, but I too am exasperated and at a loss of words to explain how obvious (I have to restrain myself from using caps) it is. It doesn't help that I have no real understanding of linguistics.
Slashdot Mirror
The open graphics project aims for 2D-only
I wouldn't go to anything organised by a right-wing host (for obviously demagogic reasons). It seems the muslims in your area don't have a reason to go either. Well done.
How do you think the people in this Austrian village feel?
there's not really a lot left after you cover "airports, customs entrances, banks, post offices, residential areas."
Go to Google Earth some time and check out China. You'll be surprised how much is left.
Christianity, in general, supports the idea of microevolution
Christianity, in general, does not oppose the theory of evolution. (Note: 2nd link does not point to a text on evolution by the German Lutheran Church specifically, but states, "The problems of genetic engineering in the non-human sphere arise first of all from the speed of the developments which are taking place; as distinct from the slowly progressing evolution of life the changes brought about by genetic engineering and its world-wide application are taking place relatively quickly". I couldn't find a more on-topic link in English, but the German Lutheran Church has repeatedly stated that they don't see a problem with evolution)
On a global scale, only fringe parts of Christianity deny evolution, it's just that they seem to have overtaken the US.
which has been governed by radical priests for too long
Well, had the CIA not overthrown the nascent Iranian democracy and replaced it with a brutal totalitarian regime, the mad priests would probably not have gotten a foothold.
But we can't have that, can we? How else would the US justify their invasions in oil-rich countries.
religion has asked science to help solve at least one of its mysteries
In fact the Vatican employs more than 30 scientists for the examination of claims of miracles. To make someone a saint of the catholic church, you need to provide evidence of a miracle, and in most cases the Vatican tries to make sure that there is in fact no reasonable scientific explanation for the occurrence, at least from their point of view.
Places of pilgrimige also usually need a miracle that the Vatican will examine.
I always thought that must be the greatest job: X-Files for real (or what the catholic church believes it to be)
It's also easy when people pay for your flights and accommodation around the world so you can tell them why they should live according to your rules.
Hey AC, I think you didn't understand. The thing is, RMS lived by his principles when it meant giving up a good job at MIT and living in a container on the campus, embarking on the project of writing a free Unix replacement. Therefore, accusing him of "it's easy when" is incorrect.
Could be purely tactical, I hear flip-flopping is out in the US ;)
Two efforts to do pretty much what you describe, one for Firefly and one for Enterprise, have recently failed to get anywhere near the scale of popular support
So, in this world RMS envisions, there might be no Enterprise and Firefly. Big loss.
See, I'm a rather big Enterprise fan, but I didn't care. It's TV, I have no real connection to it - if they feed it to me, I'm likely to be a good citizen and watch it, but if not, then not.
Instead, I have spent my entertainment money mostly locally.
Yes, the world would be very different without copyrights, but there's no proof it would be worse.
Since he has problems with a few of the Creative Commons compatible licenses, they must all be rejected in his mindset.
Did you RTFA? He explicitly says that some CC licenses are free and he agrees with them, and some are not and he doesn't. He also says that it makes no sense to talk about "the CC licenses" because they are more different than alike.
He makes this clear distinction, so your insinuation that he lumps them together is incorrect.
Then he goes on to explain that because people lump them together, he can't get this differentiation across, and thus feels himself "constrained" to reject them all.
This is a purely tactical maneuver, and is not a rejection of the free CC licenses as such.
Not so easy when you live in a container on the MIT campus.
Re a.out -> ELF and similar ancient stories. What can I say, you have a point. But then, every fricking DOS app needed its own printer driver, but do you hit WinXP over the head because of that?
there have certainly been library patches for freeware unix systems that have required significant rebuilding-from-sources, or installing-over your machine with a newer vendor supplied binary set.
Certainly "there have been". Probably on some special-case distro with 50 users. But I still haven't seen such a thing in 9 years usage mostly on Debian, but earlier also RH and SuSE. Maybe with the exception of X, but that also only just required a rebuild of all of X, and not applications using it. Anyway, X.org 7.0 gets rid of that too.
So if you want to argue not for argument's sake, at least one of these horrible examples would be helpful.
Do you disagree and suggest that there are no pain points around patch management and excessive rebuilding/redeploying on linux, or are you arguing just for arguments sake?
Again such a broad statement that makes sure you are right. Plus you open a false dichotomy with using "and" in "Do you disagree and suggest that there are no pain points".
First of all, I neither agree or disagree at this point because as I repeatedly said, I haven't encountered such and still wait for your examples. Suggesting that there are no pain points would by itself however not make your allegations of patch hell correct.
And of course there are pain points, suggesting otherwise would be moronic. Everything has pain points. The question is how they are dealt with and what tools are provided. Good distros seem to do both, at least until you provide examples to the contrary: just look at the toolset Debian provides for sitewide updates, and into their update policy for stable releases, that ensures as much as possible that behavior does not change.
If I compare that to the 100 MB service packs of Windows we have to deploy at our organisation (the actual applications not even included, which all have their own incompatible mechanisms because Windows lacks a framework they can use), which touch god-knows-what and break the other, I know which system features "excessive rebuilding/redeploying". I don't know if Windows actually has a deployment mechanism for patches, only that the guys in our IT felt the need to purchase something extra (Altiris).
In any case, a much better example of linux shared library hell would be the earlier GTK libraries, where apps often required mutually incompatible versions of GTK source distributions.
Do you even know what you are talking about? First of all, the shared library system in GNU/Linux distros ensures that security fixes to libs actually reach the apps, which is a good thing in my book. Then, what's the problem? Again, I don't think I have seen this in Debian (and I used Gnome since, what, 0.35?). Then, it's a good thing to be able to accomodate incompatible versions of libs and have apps use the right one. Much better at least than Window's "solution" of last one wins.
linux users put up with recompiling everyhing if the fix "requires" it
Not all linux users are on gentoo. When was the last time you recompiled your entire system because of glibc fixes? I haven't had to do that once in 9 years of using GNU/linux.
except that windows users expect software to keep running no matter what
That has to be the funniest thing I read all day.
GLBT community advocating violence
Advocating violence on the topic of homosexuality? Like, "let's go bash some straights?"
Or advocating violence in other contexts, like "we should bomb the fuck out of Iraq"? Because, you know, they are just normal people.
Oh puleeeeze. Can't you find something else to suck your identity out of? Your toy is dangerous.
Letting John marry Bob because "he loves him" and not letting M. Jackson love one of his kids even though "they love each other" means an inequality within the law.
WTF? Letting a grown-up soldier drive a tank after special training but not allowing it for 5-year olds means an inequality within the law?
John and Bob are consenting adults, Jackson's alleged kids aren't. Spot the difference?
Consenting adults should have the right to do whatever they please that harms none other.
in a game, it is TOTALLY out-of-character anyway.
Looking at the girl on the left I wouldn't get the idea that in-game characters do not have or talk about their sexuality.
- Discriminating against homosexuals is offensive in itself, it's not reasonable to be offensive in order to prevent being potentially offensive
- There is an infinite amount of things that people are potentially offended by. Not least of which, killing things for xp. But they single out this issue.
Mr Spock? Is that you?
Don't call it marriage then or something. Remember for a moment that even in a family there are not only kids but also parents that have needs. The same is true for gay couples even in the absence of children.
Like, if you live in an apartment for 30 years together with your partner and he dies, you shouldn't be evicted over night because you are not mentioned on the lease. If your partner has an accident and the decision needs to be made if machines shall be turned off, it should be yours, not his parents' who might not have talked to him in 20 years. Think of pensions, etc.
Marriage takes care of all this in a simple package, but so can other contracts. To deny that is utter malignance.
the bread and circuses reference is from "Take Back your Government" by RAH
Or it might be a tad older
People who buy the content are unaffected
Not true. Exactly the people that buy the content are affected.
If I as a regular customer buy a DRM'ed CD, I can't easily make a copy for my car. If I am a pirate, it's a non-issue to record a non-DRM CD over the analog out of the DRM'ed one, and people copying/buying from the pirate are not restricted either.
excluding performances, which are hard to extrapolate to software
:)
Ha! A solution to the old problem of running GPL'd code as a network service on a public server!
Yes, you have. But the thing is that English spell checkers will mark that wrong, and it's not evidently clear from the word "bliters" what you mean. Meanwhile, "Älterzähne" clearly means what it means, because it is composed of the words "alt" (old)/"Älter" (elder) and "Zähne" pl of "Zahn" (tooth).
No. This only means that German spellcheckers suck. Being a German speaker myself who uses spellcheckers in my job, I can attest to that the only thing they (well, MS's, I just realize I know no others) catch are typos. They will miss each and every meaningless word that happens to be built from meaningful words. And if you write an actually existing compound word that they don't know, they will suggest all kinds of meaningless compounds they pull from god knows where.
What good is that, and why should it prove anything except maybe how little we actually know about language.
Tell me about it :) In this topic I exchanged several posts with Krach42 who seems very knowledgeable on the subject, but I too am exasperated and at a loss of words to explain how obvious (I have to restrain myself from using caps) it is. It doesn't help that I have no real understanding of linguistics.
But isn't it obvious!