Not going to happen. The current crop of libertarians draw their philosophies (I can not bring myself to call them theories or models) from versions of economics that have not been taught in decades. An introductory course in economics would probably be dismissed and not really listened too.
Though one downside of such free upgrades is that over time packages change configuration file format, so machines that are running services and just want patches to keep secure are often out of luck. Not that I think Canonical is under any obligation to keep a pile of forked old versions and backport critical patches, but just because the upgrade is free does not mean it will not cost time and resources to handle.
Outside people being snarky or just Apple bashing, I think the issue is not one of when they stop supporting 10.6, and the poor visibility regarding their roadmap and people being unaware that security updates have stopped.
I think the issue is not how long they support an OS for, but how public they make their road map. With Microsoft users have a fairy clear and well publicized timeframe of support and lots of warning for when a particular version of Windows will no longer receive updates.
I would wager that those same people who just want to be 'left alone' do not go around ranting about people who have laptops/tablets open which often have cameras in them, even though those are also cases of a camera seeing the room.
And I believe there is a real debate there worth having, but the majority of the criticism, even if it is wrapped up in 'privacy' seem to be more cultural then anything else.
More and more I am agreeing. I do not have a use for such devices, but if I did, I would probably get one in part because my respect for the detractors and their arguments has been rapidly going down. They talk about pretentious and douchyness, but they seem to exhibit far more of it then the 'glass holes'.
Of course not, cell phones are on the 'right' side of a cultural divide and thus are 'fine'.
While people complain about the recording or the perceived pretentiousness of the owners, it is really just a mini culture war with people falling over themselves to demonstrate their own authenticity by not being one of 'those' people. It is kinda like people who go on forums to proclaim loudly how horrible social media is and how we all need to go make real friends like THEY do. They want more people in their particular subculture and they want a nice assured status within the group, mostly by demonstrating loudly how they are NOT someone the group has agreed is to be hated.
Personally I feel that people who will physically assault a person for being part of a group they are not are much bigger pretentious assholes then someone who is minding their own business with their friends.
I find the detractors far more pretentious then the people who have google glass.
Or even the rather pedestrian 'people do not like random bloggers shoving a camera in their face and just want to go about their business'. When someone does that to me, I do not care what the topic or question is, they still annoy me and I am not in a mood to cooperate or even interact with them.
Ahm.. not posting private contracts is a pretty reasonable 'routine' business practice. That is not a 'pass' it is a 'of course they are not going to publish it', and looking to it as proof they were up to something nefarious is just another 'if you are not guilty you have nothing to hide' argument.
I had a similar thought, though without seeing video of the author's behavior it is impossible to tell how much of their reaction was due to the subject vs the person doing the asking. Given that the blogger in question has built a bit of a brand and pride around being obnoxious, I would not be surprised if the latter played a role.
Maybe someone needs to build a fantasy MMO with EvE Online's advancement mechanic. While power levelers decry the skill system, it does do a pretty good job of letting people with different amounts of play time still play together.
Eventually yes, but generally construction involves a lot of digging up and moving materials around first. So if there is significant contaminated dirt it then becomes contaminated dust and that is a bit more of a problem.
One of the recurring pitfalls even good programmers run into is that it is often more fun (and affirming) to write their own implementation then to figure out how to use someone else's.
I am actually hoping that at least that part of BTC survives. As a payment method it is fantastic, so much better then giving a merchant your account information and having them pull from it.
Yeah, people tend to underestimate just how much public money goes into internet infrastructure even when companies make it look like they are only spending their own money to lay cable.... people also tend to forget that all those cables are being put on land that the telco does not own and would have no right to if the public did not hand it over.
Customers are not forbidden from starting their own ISP. However they do not get free roadwork nor access to the untold miles of public land. Bringing in a new set of lines is a massive and expensive undertaking that has significant impact on the entire region including not only power and traffic disruption but requires tearing up right of way land, which means going onto citizen's property and ripping it up. So yeah, local governments have a pretty significant incentive to not go through that whole process anytime someone asks.
Netflix pays its upstream provider. That provider pays Comcast, but Comcast and other backbones have gotten good at negotiating between each other, so Comcast can not squeeze Netflix's ISP much more. But Netflix HAS been paying for its load on Comcast's network the entire time. There is no 'free ride' here, everyone has been getting paid already. But Comcast's interest is not just in getting paid, it is in protecting its unrelated media offerings. Netflix is cutting into its cable TV profits so they are trying to make up for THAT loss, not increased network usage.
In many people's minds, the government is preventing competition via regulation. They forget that anyone is allowed to start an ISP or even telco any time they want, they just do not get magical access to all that public land for running new lines nor are they entitled to all the free road work that would be required.
Something I find ironic is that one of the classic libertarian arguments I hear about NIMBY is that if one is unhappy with what one's neighbors are doing one should use their economic resources to move. Here we have someone with more then enough cash to move where ever they want, but they still want to control what their neighbors are doing with their land.
Slashdot Mirror
Not going to happen. The current crop of libertarians draw their philosophies (I can not bring myself to call them theories or models) from versions of economics that have not been taught in decades. An introductory course in economics would probably be dismissed and not really listened too.
Though one downside of such free upgrades is that over time packages change configuration file format, so machines that are running services and just want patches to keep secure are often out of luck. Not that I think Canonical is under any obligation to keep a pile of forked old versions and backport critical patches, but just because the upgrade is free does not mean it will not cost time and resources to handle.
Outside people being snarky or just Apple bashing, I think the issue is not one of when they stop supporting 10.6, and the poor visibility regarding their roadmap and people being unaware that security updates have stopped.
I think the issue is not how long they support an OS for, but how public they make their road map. With Microsoft users have a fairy clear and well publicized timeframe of support and lots of warning for when a particular version of Windows will no longer receive updates.
I would wager that those same people who just want to be 'left alone' do not go around ranting about people who have laptops/tablets open which often have cameras in them, even though those are also cases of a camera seeing the room.
And I believe there is a real debate there worth having, but the majority of the criticism, even if it is wrapped up in 'privacy' seem to be more cultural then anything else.
That only happens with the devices made of straw.
More and more I am agreeing. I do not have a use for such devices, but if I did, I would probably get one in part because my respect for the detractors and their arguments has been rapidly going down. They talk about pretentious and douchyness, but they seem to exhibit far more of it then the 'glass holes'.
Of course not, cell phones are on the 'right' side of a cultural divide and thus are 'fine'.
While people complain about the recording or the perceived pretentiousness of the owners, it is really just a mini culture war with people falling over themselves to demonstrate their own authenticity by not being one of 'those' people. It is kinda like people who go on forums to proclaim loudly how horrible social media is and how we all need to go make real friends like THEY do. They want more people in their particular subculture and they want a nice assured status within the group, mostly by demonstrating loudly how they are NOT someone the group has agreed is to be hated.
It is kinda pathetic actually.
Personally I feel that people who will physically assault a person for being part of a group they are not are much bigger pretentious assholes then someone who is minding their own business with their friends.
I find the detractors far more pretentious then the people who have google glass.
Not really. Buying into fear and hype is not the same thing as understanding something. In fact it is kinda the opposite.
Or even the rather pedestrian 'people do not like random bloggers shoving a camera in their face and just want to go about their business'. When someone does that to me, I do not care what the topic or question is, they still annoy me and I am not in a mood to cooperate or even interact with them.
Ahm.. not posting private contracts is a pretty reasonable 'routine' business practice. That is not a 'pass' it is a 'of course they are not going to publish it', and looking to it as proof they were up to something nefarious is just another 'if you are not guilty you have nothing to hide' argument.
yeah but they did not put out a long form official statement! They must still be hiding the truth!
I had a similar thought, though without seeing video of the author's behavior it is impossible to tell how much of their reaction was due to the subject vs the person doing the asking. Given that the blogger in question has built a bit of a brand and pride around being obnoxious, I would not be surprised if the latter played a role.
Maybe someone needs to build a fantasy MMO with EvE Online's advancement mechanic. While power levelers decry the skill system, it does do a pretty good job of letting people with different amounts of play time still play together.
Eventually yes, but generally construction involves a lot of digging up and moving materials around first. So if there is significant contaminated dirt it then becomes contaminated dust and that is a bit more of a problem.
One of the recurring pitfalls even good programmers run into is that it is often more fun (and affirming) to write their own implementation then to figure out how to use someone else's.
I am actually hoping that at least that part of BTC survives. As a payment method it is fantastic, so much better then giving a merchant your account information and having them pull from it.
Eh, do not underestimate the trouble bored teenagers can cause, esp when there are lulz or status at stake.
Yeah, people tend to underestimate just how much public money goes into internet infrastructure even when companies make it look like they are only spending their own money to lay cable.... people also tend to forget that all those cables are being put on land that the telco does not own and would have no right to if the public did not hand it over.
Customers are not forbidden from starting their own ISP. However they do not get free roadwork nor access to the untold miles of public land. Bringing in a new set of lines is a massive and expensive undertaking that has significant impact on the entire region including not only power and traffic disruption but requires tearing up right of way land, which means going onto citizen's property and ripping it up. So yeah, local governments have a pretty significant incentive to not go through that whole process anytime someone asks.
Netflix pays its upstream provider. That provider pays Comcast, but Comcast and other backbones have gotten good at negotiating between each other, so Comcast can not squeeze Netflix's ISP much more. But Netflix HAS been paying for its load on Comcast's network the entire time. There is no 'free ride' here, everyone has been getting paid already. But Comcast's interest is not just in getting paid, it is in protecting its unrelated media offerings. Netflix is cutting into its cable TV profits so they are trying to make up for THAT loss, not increased network usage.
In many people's minds, the government is preventing competition via regulation. They forget that anyone is allowed to start an ISP or even telco any time they want, they just do not get magical access to all that public land for running new lines nor are they entitled to all the free road work that would be required.
Something I find ironic is that one of the classic libertarian arguments I hear about NIMBY is that if one is unhappy with what one's neighbors are doing one should use their economic resources to move. Here we have someone with more then enough cash to move where ever they want, but they still want to control what their neighbors are doing with their land.