Dude, your post would have all validity if it wasn't for the fact that this tired topic was mentioned over and over and over already... Don't worry, the censorship did not go unmentioned...
I find it amusing you simultaneously think slashdot = idiots yet you apparently worry a lot of about your karma...
Viacom is arguing, among other things(*), that when the procedure is combined with anonymous users and the enormous scale of sites like Youtube that copyright is effectively nullified as an unintended side effect of how YouTube is complying with the takedown procedures, and that congress did not intend to nullify copyright.
So, they are basically saying they don't have enough control of the internet, and that such situation should be declared as unfair by the congress, so that everyone making a site with thumbnails has to totally screen out every thing submitted by any user for copyright infringement.
So, copyright is not enough to them, they also want the world to police their own copyright for them.
They will probably win that argument, because it's clearly true.
Besides of how "true" it "clearly" is, the fact remains that the entertainment industry is spoiled and cannot stand a channel of distribution they cannot control, so they are wrong in my book. Also, what the heck? How is youtube or any web site supposed to know something is copyrighted? It should seriously be the author's responsibility to protect his own imaginary property.
aw give me a break already, so youtube removed an anti scientology link! Ok that's bad, but then again should we really get to see slashdot ramble about that whenever youtube is mentioned? Really...
I was hoping to see some sort of table on what each side says on each issue, but this sounds more like some paragraphs naming what some advisor said. I am thinking things like religion and race are given a lot more focus than these issues and I think that's at the least, a bummer.
And do you figure that the money MS is getting through your purchase will eventually be used to create a brand new anti competitive fiasco like OOXML, or update the "getthefacts" page, etc, etc,etc?
Yes, they bundle with crapware, MS subventions the cost, all and all so the Linux version is more expensive. If you just want to save bucks, you could do what you said you will, but did you notice that doing so will let them get away with it?
I for one don't think MS made the hardware, as a matter of fact, the crapware makers didn't either. I think it is non-sense that they are getting money out of buying a computer they didn't make just because it came with software I won't use.
You know, when using this article to fight global warming, you are actually pulling out a strawman, which takes you closer to the pseudoscience side of things! interesting...
the OLPC is about 150 USD, right? so, if we raise the cost by 3 USD, it now costs 153 USD. This means that for the cost we used to allowed 51 kids to have their laptop now we'll only be able to distribute it to 50 kids. Let's multiply it by a million since I guess that's the scale of the project. That means that instead of giving 1020000 laptops to children, the project will now give just 1000000.
And to think this was just so Negroponte's love of Flash could be fulfilled... I wonder how does he fell now about those 20000 kids that won't have their laptops anymore.
"Open source" is not the same as readable source, I look at the dictionary and open to me seems related to "I am able to enter there" , it means no exclusions in how you use the source. When a door is open, it does not just mean you can see the door.
Disagreement is not bad, however the reasons he used are so 'radically' wrong, that it is a shame. "open source creates a license so that nobody can ever improve the software" And that sort of non-sense is probably the last what the IT world is gonna remember about gates, this is a shame actually.
So he says Sugar should be ported to windows, may I ask who exactly wins with this? The result will be a xo with the same interface but that will run windows instead of Linux. I guess the intent is to make Microsoft happy, to ensure that the third world countries stay dependent to windows and obviously to raise the cost of the OLPC. So, Mr. Negroponte, why would you or anybody want those things to happen?
Microsoft and Novell believe big enterprises in China are willing to pay to have the US firms keep hybrid systems updated and running and for assurances that there is permission to use patented software involved.
Translation:
Microsoft and Novell believe big enterprises in China are stupid enough.
Fotunately, they are wrong. I am tagging this "waterloo"
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, your post would have all validity if it wasn't for the fact that this tired topic was mentioned over and over and over already... Don't worry, the censorship did not go unmentioned...
Heck I don't get how would MS ever intentionally break the compatibility, if it wasn't for compatibility why would people ever use windows?
So, they are basically saying they don't have enough control of the internet, and that such situation should be declared as unfair by the congress, so that everyone making a site with thumbnails has to totally screen out every thing submitted by any user for copyright infringement.
So, copyright is not enough to them, they also want the world to police their own copyright for them.
They will probably win that argument, because it's clearly true.
Besides of how "true" it "clearly" is, the fact remains that the entertainment industry is spoiled and cannot stand a channel of distribution they cannot control, so they are wrong in my book. Also, what the heck? How is youtube or any web site supposed to know something is copyrighted? It should seriously be the author's responsibility to protect his own imaginary property.aw give me a break already, so youtube removed an anti scientology link! Ok that's bad, but then again should we really get to see slashdot ramble about that whenever youtube is mentioned? Really...
I was hoping to see some sort of table on what each side says on each issue, but this sounds more like some paragraphs naming what some advisor said. I am thinking things like religion and race are given a lot more focus than these issues and I think that's at the least, a bummer.
And do you figure that the money MS is getting through your purchase will eventually be used to create a brand new anti competitive fiasco like OOXML, or update the "getthefacts" page, etc, etc ,etc?
Yes, they bundle with crapware, MS subventions the cost, all and all so the Linux version is more expensive. If you just want to save bucks, you could do what you said you will, but did you notice that doing so will let them get away with it?
I for one don't think MS made the hardware, as a matter of fact, the crapware makers didn't either. I think it is non-sense that they are getting money out of buying a computer they didn't make just because it came with software I won't use.
The problem is, that we can't build our own laptops, at least not yet.
I love how the Linux world has become a place in which ignoring the long term results of a decision is called "being pragmatic".
If you are not laughing at the reverse psychology already, you fail.
You know, when using this article to fight global warming, you are actually pulling out a strawman, which takes you closer to the pseudoscience side of things! interesting...
God forbid this site bashed windows.
And to think this was just so Negroponte's love of Flash could be fulfilled... I wonder how does he fell now about those 20000 kids that won't have their laptops anymore.
Heck indeed, I am calling it OBSPC from now, let me tag it as well.
Err, of course it isn't legally safe to use it. Microsoft hasn't ever released it to ECMA, it is not protected by OSP or whatever non-sense.
"Open source" is not the same as readable source, I look at the dictionary and open to me seems related to "I am able to enter there" , it means no exclusions in how you use the source. When a door is open, it does not just mean you can see the door.
You are not really saying OS/X is a better platform than windows, are you?
You do not need windows anymore to get locked into Microsoft!
Disagreement is not bad, however the reasons he used are so 'radically' wrong, that it is a shame. "open source creates a license so that nobody can ever improve the software" And that sort of non-sense is probably the last what the IT world is gonna remember about gates, this is a shame actually.
windows = costs more = less kids in Africa get helped.
Stop playing victim for once, ok?
Well, it is clear there is no MS plot to destroy OLPC now that they have successfully embraced it, you are right.
So he says Sugar should be ported to windows, may I ask who exactly wins with this? The result will be a xo with the same interface but that will run windows instead of Linux. I guess the intent is to make Microsoft happy, to ensure that the third world countries stay dependent to windows and obviously to raise the cost of the OLPC. So, Mr. Negroponte, why would you or anybody want those things to happen?