I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven, I told Bill that if Sandra is going to listen to her headphones while she's filing then I should be able to listen to the radio while I'm collating so I don't see why I should have to turn down the radio because I enjoy listening at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven...
I was instructed to do the same thing so I brought in an old 'boom box' and set the volume up to nine (mine doesn't have an eleven on the volume knob). I have found the 'nine' setting to be loud enough to drown out most filing noise and collating/copier noises. Sure would be nice to have a radio that turns up to eleven though.
But tonight's troll, who wants to draw traffic to his Information Week blog, got on the Slashdot front page tonight because he knows that baiting us is the way to do it.
Then don't help feed the troll by inadvertently attaching your name to it! When someone of your notoriety in the community makes a comment like that it only helps to give him the traffic that he wants. For example when I saw your post I clicked on his link and read his article just to see what the fuss is all about. You are right, but you baited the hook for him.
The US revolution a succesful one? Ask a black slave back then, or a Native American.
And I wonder how many of those principled gentlemen had slaves. G. Washington did, I am too lazy to find about others.
The early African presence in the Americas is normally associated with the slave trade in the United States, the Caribbean, Brazil, Central America, Colombia and Peru. Not generally taught in history textbooks is that Mexico was also a key port of entry for slave ships and consequently had a large African population.
In fact, during the colonial era, there were more Africans than Europeans in Mexico, according to Aguirre Beltrán's pioneering 1946 book, "The Black Population in Mexico."
BTW. Mexico did not officially abolish slavery until 1829. Mexico did in fact have a particularly dark involvement in the transfer of enslaved Africans to other parts of the Americas.
You can say whatever you want about Stalin the monster, but once he was gone life in the USSR was immensily better that under Tzarist Russia 100 years earlier,
A few million dead Ukrainians may beg to differ with you. Look up 'Holodomor'.
This is the great misconception about the Mexican Revolution, that it was a popular revolution like that of the Russian Revolution, it was not. It was orchestrated by the elite who managed to control the direction it took and maintain their position in society. They ensured the social reforms Zapata fought for never came about, the Indians were defeated, along with the workers and the autonomy Villa so desired in the North was controlled.
The Mexican Revolution should be remembered for its failure to bring about change, its failure as a revolution, it was merely a power struggle between the elites that resulted in the change of leadership but not much else. The status quo was maintained, an environment that encouraged the development of capitalism and ensured the elites would hold on to their lot. The period of the revolution is considered to be between 1910 and 1920, it wasn't until well after that the country went through a social reform, and then only briefly, when Cardenas came to power.
...and to a very high degree for France, who became a worldwide power in the 19th century.
With some sucesses in the late 1700's and very early 1800's maybe...however there are a few big historical events which suggest something totally opposite. France may have perceived itself as a world power in the 19th century and beyond, but French blunders and failures in/at Waterloo, WW I, and WW II seem to indicate otherwise.
Software itself violates the free market. For an item to have value, it must have utility and scarcity. As the marginal cost of production of a unit of software is damn near 0 (its fractions of a penny of electricity), software does not have scarcity. Thus it has no value. The rules of economics don't apply to it (or more correctly, an entirely new model needs to be created, but does not currently exist).
A simple pencil or pen for example. Niether are scarce and both have trenedous utility. Without one:
your paycheck could not be signed and/or endorsed
you couldn't sign up for direct deposit either;)
the bill of lading could not be signed for the printer your check is printed with
you couldn't take the SAT/ACT or any other written test
... and on and on...
In fact I'm willing to bet that ANYTHING you could come up with can be countered using this simple pencil/pen example. So your hypothesis returns false.
Every time a news of shooting breaks out, I always wonder why the possession of firearms is not banned entirely in this country. I am native of Japan, and where I grew up nobody but cops were allowed to carry guns. I live in New Jersey now, and I really miss a sense of security I used to have back home. Back there I never worried about getting killed and such, whereas I feel physically threatened where I live now since there have been a number of incidents of armed robberies on campus at Rutgers and in my neighborhood. (My own apartment was robbed several years ago, too.) Seriously, it makes a huge difference when I have to take into consideration the possibility of the possession of firearms when some strangers attacked me. I am aware that there are gun lobbies working against the ban of firearms, but it never made any sense to me. Could anybody enlighten me as to why people want to carry guns at all?
I seriously doubt that mate. A random armed rabble will not overthrow your government by force. You have invented the most powerful Military on the planet.
That is odd. I seem to remember a historical fact about a colonial army of civilian volunteers sending a certain king's army back across the pond.
... If you're talking about drag racing, there's no skill involved in that boring sport. Rev up, dump the clutch, and go straight. So boring.
According to this page, drag racing fans often witness acceleration faster than the space shuttle launching or a catapult assisted jet fighter, with deceleration of up to 5G's. The possibility of separated retinae for the driver seems to indicate this sport would be anything but boring for both fan and driver.
Now imagine holding a highly modified pro-stock harley to your ass while laying face forward as your launched like a pellet from a slingshot to finally reach 180MPH in about 7 seconds. The only thing between your now dirty shorts and the hot rubber tire is a 1/4 inch thick piece of poorly insulated fiberglass. I would think anyone capable of that feat has plenty 'o skill for this sport!
Education means nothing if you do nothing with it.
Well I disagree. From a very deep perspective education for self satisfaction carries meaning and value.
In the context of your point, which I do understand, the education he gives, the knowledge he imparts from his published textbooks, and his affinity to make people participate in spirited dialog demonstrate that his education and teaching credentials speak for themselves. Seems to be he's done more with his education than most can claim in a lifetime. Comparing his accomplishments to that of others is totally skewed.
John Wooden once said, "Don't confuse activity with accomplisment." That wisdom is knife that cuts both ways.
You're assuming an equal relationship between the parties. Most of the time you are not given the opportunity to seek common ground where the power relationship is disproportionate.
"Arguing with a superior is rarely a healthy career move." is exactly what I started my post with, so NO I am not assuming an equal relationship!
You wrote, "you do have to advance a set of reasons in favor of your position if you want to do the right thing for the organization", of course you are still saying that advancing the "position" is the thing to do...well if that is true then the opposing side may do exactly the same thing as you and do as much as possible to "advance" their "position" which is exactly why positional bargaining is seldom successful in maintaining healthy relationships between a superior and a subordinate.
After all you do not want to alienate your boss so much that your zeal for arguing positions creates self-inflicted barriers to getting what you want in the next project or decision that needs to be made.
Winning the argument depends on first explicitly defining the terms in a way that is advantageous to your position.
Arguing with a superior is rarely a healthy career move. Positional Bargaining is rarely sucessful unless your position is overpowering...
... because arguing tends to ruin working relationships and because overpowering positions tend to leave the other party feeling less than confirmed.
End Result: Potential unemployment or the potential glass ceiling to advancement.
It would be far better to find common ground and work from there without resorting to arguing from a position AND solidify the working relationship with one's own superiors. It's far easier to get what you want from superiors, who may not have the technical knowledge you have, when they actually like you!
My mother-in-law had one of her heart valves repaired in open heart surgery a few years ago. I was amazed. They said that if they couldn't sew it back together, that they would put in a pig's valve, with somewhat higher risk factors.
Makes you want to live near a hospital. See? City living is healthier after all!
The pig lives in the country, so what does that say?
I think it was the Canadian government that did a study of the benefits of internet access to small towns.
They basically found that it helps people find jobs in the cities faster, thus accelerating the exodus from the rural areas.
So yeah, I guess it helps small towns - by reducing the unemployment rate and breaking the cycle of despair and addiction that plagues so many of the people that live there.
Yeah! It's not like unemployment, dispair, and addictions actually exist in big cities. LOL
cause I'm tired of quoting I'll just list them in order:
1) You didn't specifically mention windows or linux in the post I originally replied to. You did say, "... an OS". So by me bringing up linux I refuted your point that "an OS" was available for free - alternative to the 5 bucks.
2) The rhetoric about paying 5 bucks for a CD you already own is amusing to me. First if you already own a CD then why are you trying to get another...anyway...each CD is a *seperately* licensed copy of commercial software. If you can't figure out why they won't "give" you another copy then there is nothing I'm going to be able to explain to you about how a per copy licensing works. Next I expect you to tell me since you own one copy that you have the right to install it on as many machines as you like. Since we both know that is precisely what happens doesn't mean it's legal or acceptable from the universities standpoint.
3) I thought you said you already had a CD? If so you don't need to "borrow" someone elses CD.
4) You didn't/don't have a license agreement for distribution/redistribution of the windows CD's simply because you bought one from IU. Only IU has that agreement.
5) As I said above any "site-license" deal IU has is between IU and M$....NOT between you, IU, and M$. You are not a representative of the Trustees of Indiana University.
6) I like your comment, "That might be the case. I wouldn't know". And I would have to agree with you whole heartedly. Might be a good idea to actually find out.
7) "You" means the person who purchased the CD from IU.
8) I told you to quit ragging on IU because you want to bitch about something you know zero about. If you think IU was getting rich off of negotiating $5 bucks a copy for it's staff and students more power to ya! Of course you could have always kept your $5 bucks and strolled down to OfficeMax and bought your own winders CD at their price and been tickled pink thinking you screwed "the man".
9) In closing I don't know or care if IU was M$'s bitch or not to avoid paying retail prices. I do know most students who actually want a legal copy of windows would rather pay $5 versus over $100 for a retail CD.
All your other comments in this thread seem to indicate you....
a) don't want to spend 5 bucks for a legal copy of windows, but you would drive 30 minutes to "use" a copy.
b) don't want to recognize that there are free alternatives to buying a 5 buck winders cd
c) do want to copy the licensed legal copies and give them away to others
d) think you have the right to do whatever you wish just because you "were" a student at IU once upon a time.
Get real dude, 5 bucks isnt squat for a legal copy.
BTW the reason you cant D/L windows from IUWARE is because the license agreement states each purchaser must physically sign for the CD and provide a valid student or employee ID.
And that license agreement says you can't redistribute the CD or make copies if it.
If you don't like it bitch at Microsoft and stop ragging on IU like some whiney arsed farmboy from Martintucky;)
Up until 2000 or so one could d/l just about any software that was available under this license agreement off of an IU website by providing your username/password. But then they decided to change the rules and make it so you had to pay $5/copy if you wanted an OS.
This is inaccurate. IU and IUPUI staff and students may login to http://iuware.iu.edu/ and download FOR FREE Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, and a bunch of other software titles for linux, osx, and winders platforms. Last I knew Red Hat AS4, WS4, and Desktop4 are OS's!
One may also "checkout" installation CD's from UITS with a valid student or employee ID card. So saying one "has" to pay $5 for an OS is Bullschit.
According to http://member.fsf.org/ the author states in the very first paragraph,
"The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization based in Boston, MA, USA. We rely on individuals like you to support FSF's mission to preserve, protect and promote the freedom to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer software, and to defend the rights of Free Software users."
The 501 (c) (3) tax designation may indicate something about it's lack of "Articles of Incorporation" you mentioned. However since the specifically use the ".Inc" suffix to their organization name I think you are right to assume they are incorporated. However, I also do not believe it is required to post their legal paperwotk on their website. Microsoft is incorporated, however I don't see their articles of incorporation posted anywhere on their site either. Same for IBM, Red Hat, et al.
As for "by-laws" I think the links to the free software philosophy that is posted all over the fsf.org/gnu.org website as well as the GNU Manifesto document, the FSF FAQ page, and the hundreds of other published articles pretty much sum up it up.
As always, if you are still not satisfied how about dropping the FSF a email and make a specific request for information. Their complete contact information is available at the bottom of every web page on their websites which is something a lot of organizations do not provide.
We DO hate the fascists in control of the USA who work together with the fascists in european politics (fascism is DEFINED as corporatism. There are a lot of fascists today.) - without the USA's backing, european fascists would be a lot less powerful.
Fascism is not defined as corporatism. In fact it is simply defined as:
a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)
The comment you made:
We do NOT hate the people of the USA as a whole (but we do wish they'd learn a little logical and rhetorical skills so they can see through the lies and bluster of their glorious leaders)
Those same people elect our "glorious leaders", as you put it, at all levels, not just national levels. So in effect we Americans practice democracy as well as preach it. That means that our logic and rhetorical skills have devised a system by which people who post/speak/write inaccurate and opinon based comments, like you, can live here without fear of govermental persecution.
I guess since you don't hate "the people of the USA as a whole..." I think I can safely assume you hate only segments of the US population. I wonder if the segment you do hate is only the segment that disagrees with you?
Reader psykocrime adds "According to this SuSE press release, SuSE has publically announced their support for RedHat's actions against SCO. Quoting from the press release: 'SCO has already been halted in Germany and we applaud Red Hat's actions to help end their activities in the US -- and beyond. We applaud their efforts to restrict the rhetoric of the SCO group -- and the FUD they are trying to instill -- and will determine quickly what actions SuSE can take to support Red Hat in their efforts.'"
It appears that UnitedLinux may not be so "United" after all.
I wonder how Connectiva and TurboLinux feel about this?
Scott
Opensource/Free Software isn't always about money
on
Funding Open Source?
·
· Score: 1
Cliff wrote, "Have the financially minded people of the Free Software community thought out the possibility of an Open Investment firm?"
This story is predicated upon the idea that "money" is a key issue in opensource/free software development and that developers depend on creating software for their income.
This couldn't be further from the truth. I co-founded a large project with three other prople. One is in the computer related field, one is a very talented high school student, one is an office manager in a contruction company, and I am a registered nurse. We do not depend on our projects development or any other software development for our personal income.
Marketing for our project is basically "word-of-mouth" and, with a total of about 9500 members since September of 2002 on our English speaking support site alone, I would argue that our marketing strategy works.
Perhaps the persuit of money is the downfall of many opensource/free software projects. "Funding" is much more than simple dollars and cents. "Funding" can also be contributions of time and attention. Spend more time soliciting that kind of funding and the money issues become mute.
"looking over the side and seeing 500 hats on the ground below."
If one could fix eye's on 500 hats below then I say it wasn't high or fast enough.
Jump out of a perfectly good aircraft at 10,000 to 13,000 feet on a sunny day and let the the wind hit your face at a meger 110MPH within the first ten seconds. After experience and with practice vertical drops at speeds of 160-180MPH can be achieved. Professional and die hard (pardon the pun) amatures can reach 200MPH with a little effort.
BTW the freefall record is something like 321MPH last time I checked. Of course one should slow to the meger 110MPH rate before going under canopy.
Linux = the kernel Red Hat Linux = the distibution
The kernel is the kernel regradless of which distibution you favor and IS quite ready...no "might be" or "maybe" to it.
Sun, the makers of Solaris are in fact slowly adopting linux (even putting out their own distibution). HP makers of HPUX have also embraced Linux and in fact were key players in the link I reviously provided concerning Sybase.
As for "management overhead and who certifies what" is left to the distribution publisher and the vendor parties. These issues of overhead exist and existed prior to Linux arriving on the scene and I suspect will continue to exist regardless.
Holding Linux responsible for "management overhead" is placing responsibility for management practices in the wrong place. Businesses regardless of what they manufacter create the overhead you speak of is soley responsible for minimizing that overhead.
The Red Hat Linux distribution addresses that issue with their three year life span products. So now I imagine that the overhead a business creates is dependant on how well they plan and implement thier strategy.
Curiously you never mentioned the overhead created by proprietary software makers impose when tight NDA's and limited (or zero) access to software source code is a factor!
Multiple versions of "fill_in_the_blank" OS, with a hodge podge cllection of "service packs" and "hot fixes" (which by the way leave your business at the whim of the proprietary software makers schedule) also create enormous overhead for management to deal with.
So even with proprietary software makers you will still have "multiple versions" at "multiple patch levels" with "varying support contracts" and "varying details to take care of etc etc".
If you don't think Solaris and HPUX have those then you are sadly misinformed or just plain don't know much about them.
If you wish to see what HPUX product life span's are visit:
http://software.hp.com/RELEASES-MEDIA/history/sl id e2.html
According to Sun their Solaris life cycle is 24-36 months and publishes updates "roughly every four months". Of course you can opt to purchase extended support contracts and gain more time in the life cycle of Solaris but then you would be entering those "varying support contact" and "varying patch level" with "varying detail" issues you spoke about.
Linux is "technically" and "business" ready for the enterprise. Further maturation is possible and probable just as it is for it's competitors. You can't hold Linux and Linux distributions to higher business standards when the examples of so called "business friendly" systems practice the exact same methods. The only difference is that Linux distros have muscled into markets that was once dominated by closed source proprietary giants by providing stablility and delivering what they promise to deliver. I believe that to be "productive results" at affordable prices with technologically sound software!
Slashdot Mirror
So far this "Database" has cost the UK Taxpayer £12 billion ($24 US Dollars) and has delivered nothing but chaos ...
For twenty-four bucks I wouldn't sweat it.
But tonight's troll, who wants to draw traffic to his Information Week blog, got on the Slashdot front page tonight because he knows that baiting us is the way to do it.
Then don't help feed the troll by inadvertently attaching your name to it! When someone of your notoriety in the community makes a comment like that it only helps to give him the traffic that he wants. For example when I saw your post I clicked on his link and read his article just to see what the fuss is all about. You are right, but you baited the hook for him.
The US revolution a succesful one? Ask a black slave back then, or a Native American. And I wonder how many of those principled gentlemen had slaves. G. Washington did, I am too lazy to find about others.
Evidently you are unaware of historical fact about slavery, the African diaspora and ultimately where those slave ships sailed to from the African coastline! Quoting http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/feature/ethnic/bv/s pec0303.html:
BTW. Mexico did not officially abolish slavery until 1829. Mexico did in fact have a particularly dark involvement in the transfer of enslaved Africans to other parts of the Americas.
You can say whatever you want about Stalin the monster, but once he was gone life in the USSR was immensily better that under Tzarist Russia 100 years earlier,
A few million dead Ukrainians may beg to differ with you. Look up 'Holodomor'.
ditto for Mexicans after our Revolution...
Quoting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Revolution#Th e_Mexican_Revolution_and_its_place_in_world_histor y:
With some sucesses in the late 1700's and very early 1800's maybe...however there are a few big historical events which suggest something totally opposite. France may have perceived itself as a world power in the 19th century and beyond, but French blunders and failures in/at Waterloo, WW I, and WW II seem to indicate otherwise.
Software itself violates the free market. For an item to have value, it must have utility and scarcity. As the marginal cost of production of a unit of software is damn near 0 (its fractions of a penny of electricity), software does not have scarcity. Thus it has no value. The rules of economics don't apply to it (or more correctly, an entirely new model needs to be created, but does not currently exist).
A simple pencil or pen for example. Niether are scarce and both have trenedous utility. Without one:
- your paycheck could not be signed and/or endorsed
- you couldn't sign up for direct deposit either
;)
- the bill of lading could not be signed for the printer your check is printed with
- you couldn't take the SAT/ACT or any other written test
... and on and on ...
In fact I'm willing to bet that ANYTHING you could come up with can be countered using this simple pencil/pen example. So your hypothesis returns false.Stallman's response is a disingenous "well you have to draw the line somewhere" and he wants the line drawn where he think it fits best.
Where did you expect him to draw it?
Every time a news of shooting breaks out, I always wonder why the possession of firearms is not banned entirely in this country. I am native of Japan, and where I grew up nobody but cops were allowed to carry guns. I live in New Jersey now, and I really miss a sense of security I used to have back home. Back there I never worried about getting killed and such, whereas I feel physically threatened where I live now since there have been a number of incidents of armed robberies on campus at Rutgers and in my neighborhood. (My own apartment was robbed several years ago, too.) Seriously, it makes a huge difference when I have to take into consideration the possibility of the possession of firearms when some strangers attacked me. I am aware that there are gun lobbies working against the ban of firearms, but it never made any sense to me. Could anybody enlighten me as to why people want to carry guns at all?
Perhaps the mayor of Nagasaki would disagree that a firearms ban is really all that effective in Japan considering he was shot dead today. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/17/news/nagasa ki.php
I seriously doubt that mate. A random armed rabble will not overthrow your government by force. You have invented the most powerful Military on the planet.
That is odd. I seem to remember a historical fact about a colonial army of civilian volunteers sending a certain king's army back across the pond.
You did it in seven days? Pfft. Try doing it in six days leaving the seventh day for rest.
... If you're talking about drag racing, there's no skill involved in that boring sport. Rev up, dump the clutch, and go straight. So boring.
According to this page, drag racing fans often witness acceleration faster than the space shuttle launching or a catapult assisted jet fighter, with deceleration of up to 5G's. The possibility of separated retinae for the driver seems to indicate this sport would be anything but boring for both fan and driver.
Now imagine holding a highly modified pro-stock harley to your ass while laying face forward as your launched like a pellet from a slingshot to finally reach 180MPH in about 7 seconds. The only thing between your now dirty shorts and the hot rubber tire is a 1/4 inch thick piece of poorly insulated fiberglass. I would think anyone capable of that feat has plenty 'o skill for this sport!
Education means nothing if you do nothing with it.
Well I disagree. From a very deep perspective education for self satisfaction carries meaning and value.
In the context of your point, which I do understand, the education he gives, the knowledge he imparts from his published textbooks, and his affinity to make people participate in spirited dialog demonstrate that his education and teaching credentials speak for themselves. Seems to be he's done more with his education than most can claim in a lifetime. Comparing his accomplishments to that of others is totally skewed.
John Wooden once said, "Don't confuse activity with accomplisment." That wisdom is knife that cuts both ways.
You're assuming an equal relationship between the parties. Most of the time you are not given the opportunity to seek common ground where the power relationship is disproportionate.
...well if that is true then the opposing side may do exactly the same thing as you and do as much as possible to "advance" their "position" which is exactly why positional bargaining is seldom successful in maintaining healthy relationships between a superior and a subordinate.
"Arguing with a superior is rarely a healthy career move." is exactly what I started my post with, so NO I am not assuming an equal relationship!
You wrote, "you do have to advance a set of reasons in favor of your position if you want to do the right thing for the organization", of course you are still saying that advancing the "position" is the thing to do
After all you do not want to alienate your boss so much that your zeal for arguing positions creates self-inflicted barriers to getting what you want in the next project or decision that needs to be made.
Winning the argument depends on first explicitly defining the terms in a way that is advantageous to your position.
...
... because arguing tends to ruin working relationships and because overpowering positions tend to leave the other party feeling less than confirmed.
Arguing with a superior is rarely a healthy career move. Positional Bargaining is rarely sucessful unless your position is overpowering
End Result: Potential unemployment or the potential glass ceiling to advancement.
It would be far better to find common ground and work from there without resorting to arguing from a position AND solidify the working relationship with one's own superiors. It's far easier to get what you want from superiors, who may not have the technical knowledge you have, when they actually like you!
My mother-in-law had one of her heart valves repaired in open heart surgery a few years ago. I was amazed. They said that if they couldn't sew it back together, that they would put in a pig's valve, with somewhat higher risk factors.
Makes you want to live near a hospital. See? City living is healthier after all!
The pig lives in the country, so what does that say?
I believe you are describing Mammalian Dive Reflex
I think it was the Canadian government that did a study of the benefits of internet access to small towns.
They basically found that it helps people find jobs in the cities faster, thus accelerating the exodus from the rural areas.
So yeah, I guess it helps small towns - by reducing the unemployment rate and breaking the cycle of despair and addiction that plagues so many of the people that live there.
Yeah! It's not like unemployment, dispair, and addictions actually exist in big cities. LOL
cause I'm tired of quoting I'll just list them in order:
... an OS". So by me bringing up linux I refuted your point that "an OS" was available for free - alternative to the 5 bucks.
1) You didn't specifically mention windows or linux in the post I originally replied to. You did say, "
2) The rhetoric about paying 5 bucks for a CD you already own is amusing to me. First if you already own a CD then why are you trying to get another...anyway...each CD is a *seperately* licensed copy of commercial software. If you can't figure out why they won't "give" you another copy then there is nothing I'm going to be able to explain to you about how a per copy licensing works. Next I expect you to tell me since you own one copy that you have the right to install it on as many machines as you like. Since we both know that is precisely what happens doesn't mean it's legal or acceptable from the universities standpoint.
3) I thought you said you already had a CD? If so you don't need to "borrow" someone elses CD.
4) You didn't/don't have a license agreement for distribution/redistribution of the windows CD's simply because you bought one from IU. Only IU has that agreement.
5) As I said above any "site-license" deal IU has is between IU and M$....NOT between you, IU, and M$. You are not a representative of the Trustees of Indiana University.
6) I like your comment, "That might be the case. I wouldn't know". And I would have to agree with you whole heartedly. Might be a good idea to actually find out.
7) "You" means the person who purchased the CD from IU.
8) I told you to quit ragging on IU because you want to bitch about something you know zero about. If you think IU was getting rich off of negotiating $5 bucks a copy for it's staff and students more power to ya! Of course you could have always kept your $5 bucks and strolled down to OfficeMax and bought your own winders CD at their price and been tickled pink thinking you screwed "the man".
9) In closing I don't know or care if IU was M$'s bitch or not to avoid paying retail prices. I do know most students who actually want a legal copy of windows would rather pay $5 versus over $100 for a retail CD.
Good day
IU has offered linux since 1996 via FTP or by asking for a CD from http://www.ussg.iu.edu./
;)
All your other comments in this thread seem to indicate you....
a) don't want to spend 5 bucks for a legal copy of windows, but you would drive 30 minutes to "use" a copy.
b) don't want to recognize that there are free alternatives to buying a 5 buck winders cd
c) do want to copy the licensed legal copies and give them away to others
d) think you have the right to do whatever you wish just because you "were" a student at IU once upon a time.
Get real dude, 5 bucks isnt squat for a legal copy.
BTW the reason you cant D/L windows from IUWARE is because the license agreement states each purchaser must physically sign for the CD and provide a valid student or employee ID.
And that license agreement says you can't redistribute the CD or make copies if it.
If you don't like it bitch at Microsoft and stop ragging on IU like some whiney arsed farmboy from Martintucky
Up until 2000 or so one could d/l just about any software that was available under this license agreement off of an IU website by providing your username/password. But then they decided to change the rules and make it so you had to pay $5/copy if you wanted an OS.
This is inaccurate. IU and IUPUI staff and students may login to http://iuware.iu.edu/ and download FOR FREE Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, and a bunch of other software titles for linux, osx, and winders platforms. Last I knew Red Hat AS4, WS4, and Desktop4 are OS's!
One may also "checkout" installation CD's from UITS with a valid student or employee ID card. So saying one "has" to pay $5 for an OS is Bullschit.
According to http://member.fsf.org/ the author states in the very first paragraph,
"The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization based in Boston, MA, USA. We rely on individuals like you to support FSF's mission to preserve, protect and promote the freedom to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer software, and to defend the rights of Free Software users."
The 501 (c) (3) tax designation may indicate something about it's lack of "Articles of Incorporation" you mentioned. However since the specifically use the ".Inc" suffix to their organization name I think you are right to assume they are incorporated. However, I also do not believe it is required to post their legal paperwotk on their website. Microsoft is incorporated, however I don't see their articles of incorporation posted anywhere on their site either. Same for IBM, Red Hat, et al.
As for "by-laws" I think the links to the free software philosophy that is posted all over the fsf.org/gnu.org website as well as the GNU Manifesto document, the FSF FAQ page, and the hundreds of other published articles pretty much sum up it up.
As always, if you are still not satisfied how about dropping the FSF a email and make a specific request for information. Their complete contact information is available at the bottom of every web page on their websites which is something a lot of organizations do not provide.
We DO hate the fascists in control of the USA who work together with the fascists in european politics (fascism is DEFINED as corporatism. There are a lot of fascists today.) - without the USA's backing, european fascists would be a lot less powerful.
Fascism is not defined as corporatism. In fact it is simply defined as:
a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)
The comment you made:
We do NOT hate the people of the USA as a whole (but we do wish they'd learn a little logical and rhetorical skills so they can see through the lies and bluster of their glorious leaders)
Those same people elect our "glorious leaders", as you put it, at all levels, not just national levels. So in effect we Americans practice democracy as well as preach it. That means that our logic and rhetorical skills have devised a system by which people who post/speak/write inaccurate and opinon based comments, like you, can live here without fear of govermental persecution.
I guess since you don't hate "the people of the USA as a whole..." I think I can safely assume you hate only segments of the US population. I wonder if the segment you do hate is only the segment that disagrees with you?
Reader psykocrime adds "According to this SuSE press release, SuSE has publically announced their support for RedHat's actions against SCO. Quoting from the press release: 'SCO has already been halted in Germany and we applaud Red Hat's actions to help end their activities in the US -- and beyond. We applaud their efforts to restrict the rhetoric of the SCO group -- and the FUD they are trying to instill -- and will determine quickly what actions SuSE can take to support Red Hat in their efforts.'"
It appears that UnitedLinux may not be so "United" after all.
I wonder how Connectiva and TurboLinux feel about this?
Scott
Cliff wrote, "Have the financially minded people of the Free Software community thought out the possibility of an Open Investment firm?"
This story is predicated upon the idea that "money" is a key issue in opensource/free software development and that developers depend on creating software for their income.
This couldn't be further from the truth. I co-founded a large project with three other prople. One is in the computer related field, one is a very talented high school student, one is an office manager in a contruction company, and I am a registered nurse. We do not depend on our projects development or any other software development for our personal income.
Marketing for our project is basically "word-of-mouth" and, with a total of about 9500 members since September of 2002 on our English speaking support site alone, I would argue that our marketing strategy works.
Perhaps the persuit of money is the downfall of many opensource/free software projects. "Funding" is much more than simple dollars and cents. "Funding" can also be contributions of time and attention. Spend more time soliciting that kind of funding and the money issues become mute.
Zoom
"looking over the side and seeing 500 hats on the ground below."
If one could fix eye's on 500 hats below then I say it wasn't high or fast enough.
Jump out of a perfectly good aircraft at 10,000 to 13,000 feet on a sunny day and let the the wind hit your face at a meger 110MPH within the first ten seconds. After experience and with practice vertical drops at speeds of 160-180MPH can be achieved. Professional and die hard (pardon the pun) amatures can reach 200MPH with a little effort.
BTW the freefall record is something like 321MPH last time I checked. Of course one should slow to the meger 110MPH rate before going under canopy.
Now thats a rush!
Zoom
Linux = the kernel
l id e2.html
c le .html
Red Hat Linux = the distibution
The kernel is the kernel regradless of which distibution you favor and IS quite ready...no "might be" or "maybe" to it.
Sun, the makers of Solaris are in fact slowly adopting linux (even putting out their own distibution). HP makers of HPUX have also embraced Linux and in fact were key players in the link I reviously provided concerning Sybase.
As for "management overhead and who certifies what" is left to the distribution publisher and the vendor parties. These issues of overhead exist and existed prior to Linux arriving on the scene and I suspect will continue to exist regardless.
Holding Linux responsible for "management overhead" is placing responsibility for management practices in the wrong place. Businesses regardless of what they manufacter create the overhead you speak of is soley responsible for minimizing that overhead.
The Red Hat Linux distribution addresses that issue with their three year life span products. So now I imagine that the overhead a business creates is dependant on how well they plan and implement thier strategy.
Curiously you never mentioned the overhead created by proprietary software makers impose when tight NDA's and limited (or zero) access to software source code is a factor!
Multiple versions of "fill_in_the_blank" OS, with a hodge podge cllection of "service packs" and "hot fixes" (which by the way leave your business at the whim of the proprietary software makers schedule) also create enormous overhead for management to deal with.
So even with proprietary software makers you will still have "multiple versions" at "multiple patch levels" with "varying support contracts" and "varying details to take care of etc etc".
If you don't think Solaris and HPUX have those then you are sadly misinformed or just plain don't know much about them.
If you wish to see what HPUX product life span's are visit:
http://software.hp.com/RELEASES-MEDIA/history/s
According to Sun their Solaris life cycle is 24-36 months and publishes updates "roughly every four months". Of course you can opt to purchase extended support contracts and gain more time in the life cycle of Solaris but then you would be entering those "varying support contact" and "varying patch level" with "varying detail" issues you spoke about.
See it yourself here:
http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/fcc/lifecy
Linux is "technically" and "business" ready for the enterprise. Further maturation is possible and probable just as it is for it's competitors. You can't hold Linux and Linux distributions to higher business standards when the examples of so called "business friendly" systems practice the exact same methods. The only difference is that Linux distros have muscled into markets that was once dominated by closed source proprietary giants by providing stablility and delivering what they promise to deliver. I believe that to be "productive results" at affordable prices with technologically sound software!
Zoom