The OSCE has done it before, they have experience and manpower to do this. I say let them survey the next elections in the US.
Ironically the US go to war allegedly to bring democracy to other countries.
Look at me, I'm a spokesman defending a major software company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense!
And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... Does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.
If Chewbacca lived on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
investment in open source products
open source business model
increase in investment
robust business model
key to a financially successful open source project
Up to here I would have easily won a round of bullshit bingo. There are two kinds of Open Source projects: Community projects that grew to useful software and those started by companies that could have done it as closed source but opensourced it for some reason.
The projects that made Open Source what it is today belong to the first class. Everybody who mentions "business", "investment", etc. in one breath with Open Source belongs to the second that would not exist without the first. Open Source is much more than "cheap support" or "free code review" and I hate it when people see it that way.
Free as in freedom, let's not forget about this, even if one can make money from OSS. To be strictly back on topic: It's no bubble as long as clueless investment bankers don't pour too much capital in projects just because they are labeled Open Source.
has given us a bubble (akin to the dot-com bubble) that is about to burst. The counter-argument is that the increase in investment is just the natural progression of a robust business model whose time has come. One point that few people, whatever their viewpoint, could disagree with is that the key to a financially successful open source project rests with the community, rather than just the technology."
Open Source Forming a Dot Com
I heard the 1633's campaign for an earth-centered universe did not go too well. Now the pope makes sure he will not be the laughing stock in the future, just as Urban VIII is today.
Sorry, really no harm intended, but this is the stupidest comment on capitalism I've ever heard. If I got it right you basically say: "Leave the politics to the rich and shut up". There are very good reasons for criticising radical capitalists and monopolies and no, I don't count envy as one. We may discuss whether Breyer falls into this category, though.
Well observed! At the bureau this complaining attitude can quickly gain momentum. People complain -> boss takes this as criticism to his management and slowly drops his fraternal attitude which in turn gives the workers more reason to complain. You end up with a boss without respect but with power and workers who don't consider their work worth doing if it was not for the cash. These few easy steps lead to an unproductive "timebomb" department.
the enemy of our enemies, and is perforce our friend.
Talking of dangerous times, this is the most dangerous concept I know. Like in "the Shiites are the enemies of our enemy Saddam."
There are plenty of search engines out there, some already very good (like vivisimo) and even ones under open source.
Jim Breyer is not against monopolies, he is just against monopolies that others have. This small-minded businessman is for the right thing for the wrong reasons.
US citicens oxidize far more carbon per man than the citicens of any other country on this planet. It's about time to prevent the unnecessary production of CO2 in the first place. And no, cruising around in fat-ass SUVs does not count as "necessary".
Oh, and while we're at it: Please vote a president that will submit the Kyoto Protocol for ratification. Ferkrissakes even China signed it!
I'm sure some of you can remember how the internet used to be 1994. Web pages were few and mostly from colleges and college students. No ads, no javascript, no flash, almost no commercial content whatsoever.
The internet was already there and it was ok the way it was. Then came more sites, search engines, Netscape, Windows 95, cheaper and faster private internet access. And with it all the vultures who came to sell things over the internet and all the lawyers who came to get their piece of the cake.
Then came kiddy porn, trojans, 9/11, and politicians trying to regulate the Net. There is no way it could have developed with these clueless powermongers aware of it. The IP protocol would do a secure handshaking between every hop and every packet would come with its hop history in a secure format.
The net would still exist, but bandwidth would be an expensive good and content providers would charge you for every crappy page the put online.
I don't like to visit countries that make me jump through hoops to enter. Of course this is quite an ideologic way to see it but it pretty much sums up what I'm feeling.
Under US pressure and the general terrorism FUD the German government decided to introduce new passport documents with RFID starting from Nov 1st 2005. I got me an old one without RFID that will be valid until 2015 and every day I am more sure I did the right thing.
Slashdot Mirror
The OSCE has done it before, they have experience and manpower to do this. I say let them survey the next elections in the US. Ironically the US go to war allegedly to bring democracy to other countries.
Jokes apart, I understand what you mean. But still I find it a little far fetched. That may be just me, though.
P.S.: I love my Trekstor Cube and find it *way* better than any iPod (which still is a great product).
Look at me, I'm a spokesman defending a major software company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense!
And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... Does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.
If Chewbacca lived on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
Nothing to see here. Move along, please.
Up to here I would have easily won a round of bullshit bingo. There are two kinds of Open Source projects: Community projects that grew to useful software and those started by companies that could have done it as closed source but opensourced it for some reason.
The projects that made Open Source what it is today belong to the first class. Everybody who mentions "business", "investment", etc. in one breath with Open Source belongs to the second that would not exist without the first. Open Source is much more than "cheap support" or "free code review" and I hate it when people see it that way.
Free as in freedom, let's not forget about this, even if one can make money from OSS. To be strictly back on topic: It's no bubble as long as clueless investment bankers don't pour too much capital in projects just because they are labeled Open Source. has given us a bubble (akin to the dot-com bubble) that is about to burst. The counter-argument is that the increase in investment is just the natural progression of a robust business model whose time has come. One point that few people, whatever their viewpoint, could disagree with is that the key to a financially successful open source project rests with the community, rather than just the technology." Open Source Forming a Dot Com
I heard the 1633's campaign for an earth-centered universe did not go too well. Now the pope makes sure he will not be the laughing stock in the future, just as Urban VIII is today.
No, I mean it. I'm through with them. Not for a month or a year. Forever!
Sorry, really no harm intended, but this is the stupidest comment on capitalism I've ever heard. If I got it right you basically say: "Leave the politics to the rich and shut up". There are very good reasons for criticising radical capitalists and monopolies and no, I don't count envy as one. We may discuss whether Breyer falls into this category, though.
Well observed! At the bureau this complaining attitude can quickly gain momentum. People complain -> boss takes this as criticism to his management and slowly drops his fraternal attitude which in turn gives the workers more reason to complain. You end up with a boss without respect but with power and workers who don't consider their work worth doing if it was not for the cash. These few easy steps lead to an unproductive "timebomb" department.
1717 words in 2 Minutes? Is this submited by a bot?
Jim Breyer is not against monopolies, he is just against monopolies that others have. This small-minded businessman is for the right thing for the wrong reasons.
Are you implying that Lars Øildrillår should show John Hummerdriver the door so he can buy his fuel at Achmed's Tavern?
If I get drunk in a pub it is me who is responsible, not the bartender that has vast stock of C2H5OH.
True. But China is also not governed by a clan that made a fortune with selling the raw material for CO2.
Oh, and while we're at it: Please vote a president that will submit the Kyoto Protocol for ratification. Ferkrissakes even China signed it!
For all of the fundamental engeneering problems of hot fusion? I really doubt it.
The internet was already there and it was ok the way it was. Then came more sites, search engines, Netscape, Windows 95, cheaper and faster private internet access. And with it all the vultures who came to sell things over the internet and all the lawyers who came to get their piece of the cake.
Then came kiddy porn, trojans, 9/11, and politicians trying to regulate the Net. There is no way it could have developed with these clueless powermongers aware of it. The IP protocol would do a secure handshaking between every hop and every packet would come with its hop history in a secure format.
The net would still exist, but bandwidth would be an expensive good and content providers would charge you for every crappy page the put online.
- Cheap
- Fast
- Low power consumption
Pick any two.I would and I would get the RFID implant or whatever it takes. I just said I don't like to.
I don't like to visit countries that make me jump through hoops to enter. Of course this is quite an ideologic way to see it but it pretty much sums up what I'm feeling.
Under US pressure and the general terrorism FUD the German government decided to introduce new passport documents with RFID starting from Nov 1st 2005. I got me an old one without RFID that will be valid until 2015 and every day I am more sure I did the right thing.