Of course these things are features. That is, marketing-features for the next version of MS Office... (who might just have even better features of this kind);-)
Yes, the gpl takes your freedom to take others freedom. What if it didn't? I think this is why you can never have complete freedom as long as others should have it too. You must limit it somewhere otherwise you have arachy (which is an unstable state, and will swiftly turn into something else).
I guess that depends quite a lot on how much the trademark in question is worth, I'd say gmail is worth a hell of alot more than libtom (and more than 250 000 dollars). This is a pretty big inconvenience for Google, I don't see why they would give up that easily.
Yeah, we all know rich people are smarter than other trash (like students for example).
But if only "authorised" people buy it, how many would then be interested in support? I can imagine scenarios like: "Oh, you use it with LINUX, then I'm afraid we can't help you or ever talk with you again (click)".
I simply killing something is what matters, why not just give them a job at a slaughterhouse?
It also sounds completely insane to let someone aim for a blind person! "Hey, I told him NOT to pull the trigger as I aimed his rifle at that guy I hate!"
If the patches received are crap, then the people who are in charge of receiving the patches and committing them should reject them, or pass them on to a 'de-crappifying' team who can look at the patch and rework it in a non-crappy manner.
Great, except for the fact that it would probably take away the whole point of people submitting patches if you still need other people to rewrite them.
CCTV operates in public areas. Anything going on there is a priori NOT private.
Well,not any more. Just becuase it's not dictaded by law, it doesn't meen that there have never existed any
kind of privacy in public places. No privacy at all, that would mean, i guess that all your thoughts are heard,
everyting you wear in your pockets are seen, you're naked and so on... Of course AV-surveillance move us more
towards this. You can no longer have a conversation in some public places without taking a substantial
risk of it being recorded by government agencies, that sounds like a good way to make people shut up.
If you don't want the government to register your political views, you can no longer express them in public.
You can't meet anyone (not even in your home) without government agencies registering that, even though you're
not yet a suspect of any crime.
I respect different views on the actual balance of security/privacy, but don't come and say you don't have to sacrifice anything.
Don't you see these laws are not about protecting people, they're about protecting the Chineese government.
"The report comes after a Chinese court jailed dissident writer Guo Qizhen for four years on Tuesday for inciting subversion over anti-government essays he posted online.
The regulations also follow a crackdown on amateur online films that mock officially approved culture."
So you can't critisize the government? And you can't mock officially approved culture?
That pretty much rules out democracy. And you think China shouldn't have democracy because
it would be against their tradition? With that logic, no traditionally communist nation should
ever have democracy because it would be against their culture.
Don't you see that censoring facts of political importance (for exapmle pretending certain events never took place) is pretty much the same thing as lying. If companies don't refuse to accept these conditions, they are in effect saying "Ok, you can keep doing this to your pepole, we'll even help you do it." thus also help keep the censor in place and making it more accepted. Now people won't be saying, "Hey, why can't we access google?".
As far as I know, the site doesn't tell you "This search-hit has been censored", it will just seem as it's never existed. With the ever-increasing significance of the internet (and google) as a base of knowledge, this censorship is an extremely important tool to control what the population knows and can base their views on. The internet could have been the biggest chance for the chineese people of obtaining real freedom, though Google along with Yahoo and Microsoft migh just have taken it away.
This really shows that these companies do not value the freeedom of the chineese people over money, why believe they value ours any higher?
Slashdot Mirror
Uhm, what? No 3G? Not even gprs/gsm? Wow... that certainly renders this device a worthless piece of fucking crap.
Sure, the same way that men hurts tampon-sales...
Of course these things are features. That is, marketing-features for the next version of MS Office... (who might just have even better features of this kind) ;-)
Yes, the earth can, and it's doing it right now. As most of humaninty hardly even wanted to try restraining it's greed
Yes, the gpl takes your freedom to take others freedom. What if it didn't? I think this is why you can never have complete freedom as long as others should have it too. You must limit it somewhere otherwise you have arachy (which is an unstable state, and will swiftly turn into something else).
I guess that depends quite a lot on how much the trademark in question is worth, I'd say gmail is worth a hell of alot more than libtom (and more than 250 000 dollars). This is a pretty big inconvenience for Google, I don't see why they would give up that easily.
Open source heroes? Then at least Eric Raymond won't come over and shoot them.
To a computer-science student like myself, this doesn't make any sense! Do they mean the most or the least significant other?
Way ahead of them, I have trained this great MegaHAL-bot to raise my future children.
Yeah, we all know rich people are smarter than other trash (like students for example).
But if only "authorised" people buy it, how many would then be interested in support? I can imagine scenarios like: "Oh, you use it with LINUX, then I'm afraid we can't help you or ever talk with you again (click)".
I'm sure we could have found other ways to move money around...
I think I've seen some of those, starring Troy McLure right?
I never learn, think that every time I read a headline like this. "That must be III Arena, now when it's GPL:ed and everything"
Yeah, and much slower too. I'm sure he also only uses his index-fingers.
I simply killing something is what matters, why not just give them a job at a slaughterhouse?
It also sounds completely insane to let someone aim for a blind person! "Hey, I told him NOT to pull the trigger as I aimed his rifle at that guy I hate!"
Or simply clean up their own fucking code =)
Cool, where can I apply for a job like that?
If the patches received are crap, then the people who are in charge of receiving the patches and committing them should reject them, or pass them on to a 'de-crappifying' team who can look at the patch and rework it in a non-crappy manner.
Great, except for the fact that it would probably take away the whole point of people submitting patches if you still need other people to rewrite them.
Well,not any more. Just becuase it's not dictaded by law, it doesn't meen that there have never existed any kind of privacy in public places. No privacy at all, that would mean, i guess that all your thoughts are heard, everyting you wear in your pockets are seen, you're naked and so on... Of course AV-surveillance move us more towards this. You can no longer have a conversation in some public places without taking a substantial risk of it being recorded by government agencies, that sounds like a good way to make people shut up. If you don't want the government to register your political views, you can no longer express them in public. You can't meet anyone (not even in your home) without government agencies registering that, even though you're not yet a suspect of any crime.
I respect different views on the actual balance of security/privacy, but don't come and say you don't have to sacrifice anything.
That's why the moon is so interesting for science, there's the rich cheese-resoucres needed to feed the mice.
"The report comes after a Chinese court jailed dissident writer Guo Qizhen for four years on Tuesday for inciting subversion over anti-government essays he posted online.
The regulations also follow a crackdown on amateur online films that mock officially approved culture."
So you can't critisize the government? And you can't mock officially approved culture? That pretty much rules out democracy. And you think China shouldn't have democracy because it would be against their tradition? With that logic, no traditionally communist nation should ever have democracy because it would be against their culture.
Of course it would make me more productive, the bigger the screen, the more terminals i can use at the same time! ;)
Though, in Sweden, the police does not need a written warrant to search your house.
I'd say it'll eventually come down to this: Will the Wiimote be durable enough?
Don't you see that censoring facts of political importance (for exapmle pretending certain events never took place) is pretty much the same thing as lying. If companies don't refuse to accept these conditions, they are in effect saying "Ok, you can keep doing this to your pepole, we'll even help you do it." thus also help keep the censor in place and making it more accepted. Now people won't be saying, "Hey, why can't we access google?".
As far as I know, the site doesn't tell you "This search-hit has been censored", it will just seem as it's never existed. With the ever-increasing significance of the internet (and google) as a base of knowledge, this censorship is an extremely important tool to control what the population knows and can base their views on. The internet could have been the biggest chance for the chineese people of obtaining real freedom, though Google along with Yahoo and Microsoft migh just have taken it away.
This really shows that these companies do not value the freeedom of the chineese people over money, why believe they value ours any higher?