I do. The "GPL is viral" meme was invented by GPL-haters as a replacement for real arguments, and spread by trolls and useful idiots.
Viral is an appropriate term and call to action for any software company who bothers to employ people who enjoy writing software while being gainfully employed (In RMS's utopia, those programmers are unemployed). Those businesses need to guard against viral GPL code being insert into their products through ignorance or zealotry if they want to avoid bad PR or being deprived of their intellectual property. For a company who makes their money by creating new and innovative software, they should avoid third party GPL software like the plague!
What motivates and drives GNU members to write the GPL v3? Blockquoth the GNU manifesto:
In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the post-scarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be able to make a living from programming.
In the real world, programmers that actually find making a living programming enjoyable will find Stallman's crackpot vision quite depressing.
Some parts of the contract are illegal in norway. So I think Microsoft will have to change them, since our justice department is bought, like yours.
Ummm Linpro, a company, goes to the government to complain about a competitor's contract. The government happily interferes on behalf of Linpro. So what Justice Department is bought again?
And to what detriment do this state of affairs have on business that relies on contracts in Norway?
It's well written and treats the "virtual" dispute with "virtual" property with appropriate tongue in cheek. If you don't have time to read the PDF, here's a summary.
Second Life allows and encourages the buying and selling of property in 2003, a first for virtual worlds.
Bragg buys property in 2005, based on Lindon's you-own-property marketing blitz. He makes and sells "fireworks" in Second Life.
Bragg buys some property in 2006 for $400.
Lindon says the seller obtained the property though an exploit. Lindon freezes Bragg's account.
Bragg sues.
Lindon wants to compel Bragg to use the arbitration procedure - that's presumably favorable to Lindon Labs - defined through Terms Of Service. (The TOS says he can't sue).
Court says nope, he can sue. (Interestingly, the court said that he's legally entailed to sue because it's interstate commerce. If Second Labs was a free service a-la Google -- I wouldn't call being shown ads "commerce" -- then perhaps the TOS would apply and one wouldn't be able to sue, in my IANAL opinion.)
It's hard to say... international programs like this are generally rife with corrupt (can we say "oil-for-food"?).
It's funny that you mention "oil-for-food" scandal, which involved top to bottom corruption at the UN. Now who, again, will administerainternationalcarbon credits program?
Here's a particularly disgusting one: "carbon financing will be used to fight poverty," the wealth transfer policy is the environmental policy -- like all carbon trading schemes are, just this one is more upfront about it.
Equation writers are historically very bad, especially industry leader Mathtype; they're proprietary, clunky and generally unfriendly. OpenOffice Math is suitably primitive, forcing users to type their equations in a non-standard markup language before they are rendered.
Enter Office 2007 with a new and much improved equation editor. Like WordPerfect has for years Microsoft has included a crippled yet somewhat capable version of MathType, complete with ads for an improved version (that's not so improved), However, in Office 2007 Microsoft has bothered to create a very new and streamline equation editor. Furthermore, it blows out the market for MathML generation tools in terms of ease of use. Coupled with new first class support for managing Works Cited and other academic essentials, Word is an outstanding academic word processing program.
Lets review, Word 2007 is:
User friendly for the non-computer geek (yes, that's right, not every academic is a computer science geek)
Optimized for serious academic word processing without a huge learning curve, complete with generous pricing for academic endevors
Open, standards compliant equation editor
The best word processor ever (okay, that admittedly arguable and a larger debate)
Yet these journals want people to use inferior software. I can only conclude that these publications are either new-technology-phobics, insisting on using obsolete Word software (odd, considering the nature of Science). Or they're pushing an agenda, as indicated about comments to use "ODF". It seems strange that they'll accept ".doc" and suggest that people use older software even though ".docx" is far more open and free to use in other software. Perhaps they're trying to dissuade people from even trying Office 2007 to see that it's vastly superior to freeware alternatives and even previous versions of Office...
El cheapo Inkjet: Roll the dice, but probably less than 30 years; perhaps as low as five.
That's way too optimistic. A "cheapo" ink/paper print may only last weeks or months -- they can look great out of the printer and fade or change colors quickly even under normal indoor lighting conditions.
So you provide pseudo-legal insight for IBM's (DBA Pamela Jones) propaganda machine? How much do they pay you for your hilarious insights? Don't tell me you're a sucker.
Fortunately, for now, I still enjoy a 7.9% rate on the card which is the only reason I haven't canceled it (that and I enjoy the occasional remark on the Penguin logo on the card).
Carrying a balance on your credit card is just throwing money away. Pay off your card(s) -- immediately, sell your CD's (not the music ones), drain your savings accounts, sell your stocks (probably shouldn't cash in your 401k due to the penalty) and do it NOW! After that, pay off your balance each month and ignore your "low" interest rate and your high credit limit. Don't worry, credit card companies make plenty of money in processing fees that they charge vendors without you gifting them 7.9% APY of your balance. Don't even think about using your credit card for "emergencies". Save $200-$500 a month in a saving account until you accumulate a few thousand dollars. You'll have a rainy day fund in no time.
You think journalists were ignorantly reporting "global cooling" in the '60s, but you think their alarmist reporting of "global warming" is fully vetted and well balanced?
BTW, I'm sorry, I haven't listened to Rush Limbaugh in more than a year so I don't know my proper talking points to respond to you properly.
I'm aware that the evidence for global warming isn't as conclusive as some rabid environmentalists would have you believe
Okay, good, showing some reasoned caution.
Also, the predictions of global cooling was based on a flawed model, one whose errors have been found, explained, and fixed.
BAM! Everything is known, explained, and right as rain!\ The idea of global cooling happened during a time of slight general cooling (from 1940 - 1970). It's no accident that the models of the time just so happened to fit expectations (the weather outside). Just like today, we're going though a period of slight warming, and the complex, arbitrary models fit perfectly and spell DOOM and DISASTER, just like the old global cooling models.
Maybe this has something to do with the fact that Windows Media Center Edition is now known as Windows Vista Premium (or Ultimate), which is selling very well and the Media Center features don't need their own confusing branding campaign.
You may be a Libertarian, but you're not very Libertarian in your thinking. You seem very concerned that others are buying "pure trivialities." In fact, you accuse the entire industry of being bad economics.
However, let me also state that this is completely fallacious reasoning. This is just the 'smashed-glass = good economy' fallacy repackaged. All those laptop makers, web designers, and advertising agencies are spending money creating a useless, inefficient product, when they could instead be creating a useful, efficient product.
Sorry, you really have to twist the "smashed-glass" fallacy to make this one fit.
Luxury items (like this laptop, cruises and sports cars -- that you call useless) and the industry behind them serve a natural, important, and productive role in an economy - they encourage people to produce, provide jobs, invest and innovate in order to accumulate wealth to buy neat things and services.
H&R Block's TaxCut 2006 Basic is completely free this year. No registration, just download (about 30 megs) and install. You pay an additional fee only if you want to e-file. Print out the forms and mail them and it's free. TaxCut Basic will handle anything as simple as 1040ez or as complex as you want (interest income, business income, etc).
That X% increase has a monetary value in the aggregate. I'd love a link to a scientific study of that value.
You pointed out your bias pretty clearly. Now you're looking for evidence (which you'll find -- you can find evidence of anything) to validate your bias, further skewing your world view. You might want to consider expanding your perspective.
It doesn't take over your machine (even VM Ware player installs funky drivers)
It has a much better workstation experience than VM Ware's free offerings (Player or Server).. the UI is minimalist and easy to use, yet fully functional (compare to VMWare's gargantuan MDI/tabbed interface), and its tiny (<20 megs) compared to VMWare's bloated offering
Let's just be clear that they are not doing this because they care about my mom. If that were the case, they could pop up messages (screaming sirents, blinking lights, whatever) that it's not a valid copy of Windows, that she will not be able to get technical support, and her data and hardware could be at risk. She is an adult and can choose to continue at her own risk, or investigate what is going on. The fact that they instead shut down the OS indicates that it's all about the money, not the customer. Which any idiot could have guessed anyway I suppose.
You might want to check up on your facts. In fact, Windows does not shut down computers as the FUDers claim, but does almost what you described. Except, instead of screaming sirens, blinking lights, etc, it's just a polite notification bubble that tells you that your Windows is counterfeit and has a link to buy an authentic copy and how to report the people who sold you stolen software. You can even get a free copy of Windows under certain circumstances.
This explains better than I can the reasoning behind the program.
Yahoo notes that there are 'no security risks' since they keep absolute control of usernames and passwords.
This is BS. A phishing site could trivially replicate Yahoo's sign in page and steal credentials. And with Yahoo encouraging third party sites to accept Yahoo logins, this will encourage even experienced users to let their guard down and to be fooled into entering their credentials into a malicious site.
Microsoft's approach is appropriate given that they do not want to be any more open than they're forced to be, but they certainly don't have any room to complain that the EU isn't telling them what they need to know.
I don't disagree with all of your position. However, I do think that it's impossible to come to terms on principles when you fundamentally have different worldviews. Microsoft has a team of tens of thousands of super-bright programmers, testers and managers committed to building innovative software that they hope will sell. They can adhere to specifications if given (by the EU - they've demonstrated their ability to do so with XP N), but reconciling their principles (developing a product that customers will choose to upgrade to) with EU's (too complex to fit here) is impossible.
Because of this conundrum, Microsoft says, "Okay, what changes do you want us to make?" This isn't a new thing for Microsoft, they have vast numbers of customers that dictate what they want and what they'll buy.
However, EU's response that Microsoft should comply with principles without giving specifics is not fair, especially under the threat (and inevitable issuance of) large fines.
I can check any of these things that i like, and they'll be included in the installation. For OEM installs, they could just include everything by default.
Most importantly, make them removable through Add/Remove Programs, so that if i decide at a later date that I no longer need a feature, i can uninstall it completely.
That might work for you, but might not work for EU (bad pun). The EU is making up the rules as they go along, so why should Microsoft make changes before the EU dictates exactly how they want Vista to look if they're going to get fined anyway?
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm Linpro, a company, goes to the government to complain about a competitor's contract. The government happily interferes on behalf of Linpro. So what Justice Department is bought again?
And to what detriment do this state of affairs have on business that relies on contracts in Norway?
It's well written and treats the "virtual" dispute with "virtual" property with appropriate tongue in cheek. If you don't have time to read the PDF, here's a summary.
It's funny that you mention "oil-for-food" scandal, which involved top to bottom corruption at the UN. Now who, again, will administer a international carbon credits program?
Here's a particularly disgusting one: "carbon financing will be used to fight poverty," the wealth transfer policy is the environmental policy -- like all carbon trading schemes are, just this one is more upfront about it.
Equation writers are historically very bad, especially industry leader Mathtype; they're proprietary, clunky and generally unfriendly. OpenOffice Math is suitably primitive, forcing users to type their equations in a non-standard markup language before they are rendered.
Enter Office 2007 with a new and much improved equation editor. Like WordPerfect has for years Microsoft has included a crippled yet somewhat capable version of MathType, complete with ads for an improved version (that's not so improved), However, in Office 2007 Microsoft has bothered to create a very new and streamline equation editor. Furthermore, it blows out the market for MathML generation tools in terms of ease of use. Coupled with new first class support for managing Works Cited and other academic essentials, Word is an outstanding academic word processing program.
Lets review, Word 2007 is:
Yet these journals want people to use inferior software. I can only conclude that these publications are either new-technology-phobics, insisting on using obsolete Word software (odd, considering the nature of Science). Or they're pushing an agenda, as indicated about comments to use "ODF". It seems strange that they'll accept ".doc" and suggest that people use older software even though ".docx" is far more open and free to use in other software. Perhaps they're trying to dissuade people from even trying Office 2007 to see that it's vastly superior to freeware alternatives and even previous versions of Office...
Maybe because they received $760 million from Microsoft. A lame, ineffective company can spend that down for a long time.
Maybe they'll impose sanctions on themselves when they miss their Kyoto targets by an embarrassing margin despite their costly Enron-style cap and trade scheme, the same policy the US is rejecting in TFA.
Thank you for submitting yet-another alternative energy idea. Unfortunately, your idea suffers from the following problems:
General:
[X] The jury is out on whether or not it takes more fuel to produce it than is produced
Environmentalists
[X] Environmentalists won't go for it because it makes CO2
Conclusion
[X] Wake me up when it's not vaporware
You think journalists were ignorantly reporting "global cooling" in the '60s, but you think their alarmist reporting of "global warming" is fully vetted and well balanced?
BTW, I'm sorry, I haven't listened to Rush Limbaugh in more than a year so I don't know my proper talking points to respond to you properly.
Maybe this has something to do with the fact that Windows Media Center Edition is now known as Windows Vista Premium (or Ultimate), which is selling very well and the Media Center features don't need their own confusing branding campaign.
H&R Block's TaxCut 2006 Basic is completely free this year. No registration, just download (about 30 megs) and install. You pay an additional fee only if you want to e-file. Print out the forms and mail them and it's free. TaxCut Basic will handle anything as simple as 1040ez or as complex as you want (interest income, business income, etc).
*Virtual PC is better because...
This explains better than I can the reasoning behind the program.
Microsoft's approach is appropriate given that they do not want to be any more open than they're forced to be, but they certainly don't have any room to complain that the EU isn't telling them what they need to know.
I don't disagree with all of your position. However, I do think that it's impossible to come to terms on principles when you fundamentally have different worldviews. Microsoft has a team of tens of thousands of super-bright programmers, testers and managers committed to building innovative software that they hope will sell. They can adhere to specifications if given (by the EU - they've demonstrated their ability to do so with XP N), but reconciling their principles (developing a product that customers will choose to upgrade to) with EU's (too complex to fit here) is impossible.
Because of this conundrum, Microsoft says, "Okay, what changes do you want us to make?" This isn't a new thing for Microsoft, they have vast numbers of customers that dictate what they want and what they'll buy.
However, EU's response that Microsoft should comply with principles without giving specifics is not fair, especially under the threat (and inevitable issuance of) large fines.
I can check any of these things that i like, and they'll be included in the installation. For OEM installs, they could just include everything by default.
Most importantly, make them removable through Add/Remove Programs, so that if i decide at a later date that I no longer need a feature, i can uninstall it completely.
That might work for you, but might not work for EU (bad pun). The EU is making up the rules as they go along, so why should Microsoft make changes before the EU dictates exactly how they want Vista to look if they're going to get fined anyway?
Thanks for enlightening us all with your rant. In fact, please send me your resume, so I know to never hire you if I get the chance.