This isn't about limiting what can be put in a contract; this is about rqeuiring everything to be in clear, straightforward language, rather than intentionally confusing and overcomplicated language. Just thought I would clarify that for you.
I could see a lot of uses for it. Not nessarly the ASCII Filter but other filters can be nice. Say a brightness filter may make you better able to see in low light.
Hmm... goggles that let you see in the dark... where have I seen that before?
Right... because we have to put up with viruses on every web page we go to...
If you're going to make an analogy, you should come up with a better one. Sure, viruses may use C, but (if you're smart) you'll never run into one. Annoying Flash ads, on the other hand, are commonplace on many legitimate sites. Now before somebody screams "Adblock!", just remember that ads should be useful and relevant, not resource-intensive and obtrusive.
Let's look at these software awards as movie reviews. I wouldn't trust some bum off the street to tell me if a movie is good or not; I don't know them, I don't know what biases they might have, and I don't know what tastes they have. Instead, I would go to an established movie critic, a friend, or a family member and see what they have to say about the movie.
I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think your idea of a fine is fair. I'm sorry for the car analogy, but it would be like fining somebody if their car was hijacked and the hijacker was caught speeding. Sure, they could have prevented it, but is it really fair to punish the victim? While I agree that people should take the responsibility to secure their computers and networks, I don't think that this is the proper way to go about it.
If they really cared about civil liberties, they would release it freely online via P2P. Of course, they wouldn't make money from it, but that's not the goal, or at least it shouldn't be. If you have to pay for it or obtain it illegally, only those who are already concerned about civil liberties will see it, but if it is distributed freely, then it has the potential to reach a much larger audience. That's what their goal is, right?
Your argument reads like the typical pro-BSD summary. I'm not taking sides, but here's the pro-GPL view...
While you are letting everybody do what they want, that doesn't mean that everybody else has to play by your rules. Microsoft, for example, could come snatch up your code, tweak it a little, and put it in Windows as the next big thing, without giving away a single line of code. With the GPL, others must continue to distribute your work, as well as their modifications to it, freely.
I know it might seem too crazy to be true, but not everybody uses their computer for games and movies. Many people just want to be able to email and im their friends and family, browse the web, and type up reports for school. Especially in places like India (the place in question in the article), where money is much more of a concern, your argument just doesn't hold up.
I have never understood why poor whites, then or now, backed the slavery system which kept them in poverty.
You're focusing on the economic side of things, forgetting social implications. Those "poor whites" saw nothing morally wrong with slavery (or else they wouldn't have supported it), and slavery kept them from being the bottom rung on the social ladder. You have to remember that even the poorest white man had more social standing than a slave, and that is sometihng that they didn't want to give up.
In a small business you could have everything you need (programs, documents, emails, etc.) on one server that you could easily manage. It can provide most of the benefits of a thin client solution without the hassle. For example, users could access everything from locked down clients, but there isn't the hassle of booting over the network or using programs other than an ordinary web browser.
Everybody seems to be attacking the whole idea of a Web OS, citing issues with security, network downtime, and so on. However, the idea of an open source, possibly Linux-based Web OS is quite intriguing. Everybody seems to be forgetting the "open" part of it. Just imagine, for example, an open source alternative to Google Apps. If you could download it and host it all on your own internal server, it eliminates most of the issues with a Web OS. You could have all your documents, emails, and programs stored in one central location that you have complete control over.
Clearly you don't know our history too well. During the Gilded Age (about 1877-1900) in the United States, political machines, which controlled all levels of government, were commonplace in some cities. Because the ballots back then were open, those political machines could intimidate voters into voting their way. However, the Australian (secret) ballot put an end to that. Then again, history seems doomed to repeat itself...
It really makes you wonder. First, Novell makes a shady deal with Microsoft, and now Dell is in talks with Novell to offer Linux or their computers. Personally, I would keep a close watch on Microsoft's reaction to this, as they may have some stake in it. Not to be a cynic, but the whole series of events seems to be unfolding rather unusually.
Looking at the responses to the pre-installed OpenOffice suggestion, it seems that some people just don't understand what this is all about. Just to shoot them down...
Plus I think the Open Source License policy prohibits software to be pre-installed and sold within a PC.
That's just plan wrong.
I am also unclear on the advantage of bundling software that can be downloaded for free. Especially since this prevents you from picking and choosing which components you wish to install, something I like to do with every piece of software I install. I could see perhaps having a folder with installers for a variety of open-source software saved in the Documents folder when the computer arrives and letting people just go through and install what they wish when they first start it up.
Sure it can be downloaded freely, but not everybody has a (fast) Internet connection, or even knows that this great free software exists. Not to mention that many users are literally scared when it comes to installing software...
There is that fine line difference between GIMP and Photoshop that makes the pros choose Photoshop.
Way to go and forget about the casual home user.
You are not going to get much control over your system with anything that is preinstalled. One of the advantages of Linux is being able to tailor the installation to suit your needs, tweaking your options, installed components, kernel modules and such. Having it preinstalled defeats the whole purpose in my opinion.
Most people don't care about control. They just want it to work, and they'll be happy if they get their computer cheaper due to free software.
First of all, as preinstalled software Dell would be required to offer customer support for it.
Who said that Dell needs to provide in-depth support, or any at all? Most people probably don't need support anyway.
Dell would be forced to ship officially supported versions of the distros like SUSE, Red Hat Enterprise etc.
Why would anyone think that? It's not like Microsoft gives Dell support for Windows; that's Dell's job. I think most people would be fine with a warranty-free distro like Ubuntu anyway.
We all have our own list of favorite freeware, what makes your list so special? I might want a completely different set.
This isn't "freeware", it's free and open source software. There's a big difference. Besides, I don't see any other great free alternatives to the likes of OpenOffice or Firefox. (There's Opera, but that's closed source.)
I think the peeps have spoken and shown that if Sony wasn't bundling BluRay in with PS3s that almost nobody would be getting one.
Did you ever consider that some people might be getting a PS3 because it's a BluRay player? I have no clue what the actual numbers are like, but that certainly is a possibility.
Ringing bells alone won't paralyze you with fear (at least not normal people...), but when they mean that there's an earthquake and that the building you're in might collapse on you then they sure could.
By your own logic, software, which is written by humans, will have a margin of error, at least in complex software. Therefore, any product of that software is subject to error.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't about limiting what can be put in a contract; this is about rqeuiring everything to be in clear, straightforward language, rather than intentionally confusing and overcomplicated language. Just thought I would clarify that for you.
Hmm... goggles that let you see in the dark... where have I seen that before?
Right... because we have to put up with viruses on every web page we go to...
If you're going to make an analogy, you should come up with a better one. Sure, viruses may use C, but (if you're smart) you'll never run into one. Annoying Flash ads, on the other hand, are commonplace on many legitimate sites. Now before somebody screams "Adblock!", just remember that ads should be useful and relevant, not resource-intensive and obtrusive.
Let's look at these software awards as movie reviews. I wouldn't trust some bum off the street to tell me if a movie is good or not; I don't know them, I don't know what biases they might have, and I don't know what tastes they have. Instead, I would go to an established movie critic, a friend, or a family member and see what they have to say about the movie.
I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think your idea of a fine is fair. I'm sorry for the car analogy, but it would be like fining somebody if their car was hijacked and the hijacker was caught speeding. Sure, they could have prevented it, but is it really fair to punish the victim? While I agree that people should take the responsibility to secure their computers and networks, I don't think that this is the proper way to go about it.
Let me fix that for you...
Is this not something that will in theory affect all shoppers?
If they really cared about civil liberties, they would release it freely online via P2P. Of course, they wouldn't make money from it, but that's not the goal, or at least it shouldn't be. If you have to pay for it or obtain it illegally, only those who are already concerned about civil liberties will see it, but if it is distributed freely, then it has the potential to reach a much larger audience. That's what their goal is, right?
Your argument reads like the typical pro-BSD summary. I'm not taking sides, but here's the pro-GPL view...
While you are letting everybody do what they want, that doesn't mean that everybody else has to play by your rules. Microsoft, for example, could come snatch up your code, tweak it a little, and put it in Windows as the next big thing, without giving away a single line of code. With the GPL, others must continue to distribute your work, as well as their modifications to it, freely.
I know it might seem too crazy to be true, but not everybody uses their computer for games and movies. Many people just want to be able to email and im their friends and family, browse the web, and type up reports for school. Especially in places like India (the place in question in the article), where money is much more of a concern, your argument just doesn't hold up.
In a small business you could have everything you need (programs, documents, emails, etc.) on one server that you could easily manage. It can provide most of the benefits of a thin client solution without the hassle. For example, users could access everything from locked down clients, but there isn't the hassle of booting over the network or using programs other than an ordinary web browser.
Everybody seems to be attacking the whole idea of a Web OS, citing issues with security, network downtime, and so on. However, the idea of an open source, possibly Linux-based Web OS is quite intriguing. Everybody seems to be forgetting the "open" part of it. Just imagine, for example, an open source alternative to Google Apps. If you could download it and host it all on your own internal server, it eliminates most of the issues with a Web OS. You could have all your documents, emails, and programs stored in one central location that you have complete control over.
Clearly you don't know our history too well. During the Gilded Age (about 1877-1900) in the United States, political machines, which controlled all levels of government, were commonplace in some cities. Because the ballots back then were open, those political machines could intimidate voters into voting their way. However, the Australian (secret) ballot put an end to that. Then again, history seems doomed to repeat itself...
It really makes you wonder. First, Novell makes a shady deal with Microsoft, and now Dell is in talks with Novell to offer Linux or their computers. Personally, I would keep a close watch on Microsoft's reaction to this, as they may have some stake in it. Not to be a cynic, but the whole series of events seems to be unfolding rather unusually.
This only affects the 1.5.x branch, not the current 2.x stuff...
Did you ever consider that some people might be getting a PS3 because it's a BluRay player? I have no clue what the actual numbers are like, but that certainly is a possibility.
Well, I was doing some bash scripting at the time... no need to over-analyze it...
Using yes would just be too simple...
You must be new here.
Ringing bells alone won't paralyze you with fear (at least not normal people...), but when they mean that there's an earthquake and that the building you're in might collapse on you then they sure could.
A tag isn't useful if it works for every article...
By your own logic, software, which is written by humans, will have a margin of error, at least in complex software. Therefore, any product of that software is subject to error.