The Free in FOSS doesn't necessarily refer to its costs. The Free typically means that you are Free to take the software, see how it works, modify it to fit your needs, and distribute your improvements and changes to others.
Ah, but isn't another Pillar of Libertarianism the right to personal property and defense of that property? I know I've discussed with people on here and other sites whenever an RIAA story comes out, that the artists (read: Labels) have a right to their property, both real and intellectual, and so their copyright on the song (or book or whatever) should continue indefinitely, and should be allowed to pass on to their children, and children's children, and so on.
The thing is, signing a petition is a show of support for a particular cause, not just a show of support for the rights of people to vote on things. And again, if enough people that actually believe in the cause can't be found to sign the petition, then it doesn't bode well for your chances of winning an election.
Well, I believe that the petition is the part where those who strongly believe that the status quo should be changed (or feel really strongly that it should remain the same), and want a decision made on it. The election is for those people who, initially probably have no strong feelings one way or the other, but hearing both sides of the issue make up their mind how they feel.
The line that most people think repeals the law is when Jesus says, "I have not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it." (Matthew 5:17). However, in the early days of the Catholic Church, the question came up as to who could become Catholic. Specifically, if someone wanted to join the Church, was it necessary for them to be Jewish first, and observe all the things that came with it, like being circumcised and observing Jewish dietary restrictions. Since it was decided that no, one doesn't have to be Jewish before being Christian, many of the things in the Torah were no longer observed. One could argue this would include the ban on homosexuality (which really stems from the commandment Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery).
Except no one is trying to force gay marriage on religions. Churches currently have the right to refuse to perform a marriage if they don't believe the two participants will live a lifestyle consistent with that church's beliefs, and they continue to have that right where gay marriage is legal. What a church does not have the right to do is actually perform a gay marriage if they so wish. And yes, there are several Christian churches that are perfectly fine with performing a gay marriage.
A fundamentally apathetic person probably wouldn't be signing a petition. And if you don't feel that strongly one way or another on the issue to have your name associated with either side, then maybe you shouldn't sign the petition, and wait for it to come up to the ballot where you can express your support for the issue in private.
If you don't want your name associated with the cause, then don't sign the petition. A petition only needs a small percentage of the registered voters to get something on the ballot for a reason. And if your cause can't even find that many people willing to stand up and proclaim what you believe in, then maybe that's a good indicator that your position does not have the levels of support needed to win.
Historically, there have been reasons why the actual votes someone casts in an election are kept private. In some parts of the world, if it gets out that you voted for Candidate X, then that could mean you've just lost your house, your land, and your family. I'd like to think the US is not one of those places, however there can be other bad things that happen to you if it comes out that you voted one way on something when you'd rather keep that private.
Now a public petition is another thing, as these things need to be verified that the people that actually signed it exist, and wanted to sign it.
You probably were joking, but I do think that every degree has value. People studying women's studies, LGBT studies, black studies are just as important to society as those studying physics, math, and engineering. The people in the second group are helping to increase our society's understanding of the physical universe, and increase our level of technology. That's good. However, the people in the first group are helping to increase our understanding of ourselves. Why we think the way we do; what really makes us tick. And I think that's just as valuable as figuring out how to use technology to be able to visit a webpage while I shit on a device that fits in the palm of my hand.
I don't see how that is a negative point; its the same argument used in favor of the consoles. If I know that everyone has the same stuff, then I know that everyone is going to get the same experience, and that makes it easier on me.
While differing phones having a common platform makes it easier for software to be ported between them, don't you still really need access to each phone for testing on each of them?
I have to ask: I've been programming Objective C off and on for a few years now (around the time they switched to Intel), and while Objective C 2 brought a lot of good stuff with it, is dot notation really that big of a deal?
1). I don't really care about innovations done for "scalability" done for PCs. With a console, you know exactly what everyone has, therefore you can optimize your art assets, audio assets, and your engine to run on that specific hardware. With a PC, you're wasting time trying to figure out how to dynamically determine if this player has obscure graphics feature C and dealing with turning it on or off. That's time that could be spent on real innovations, such as gameplay, that the "market" (players) actually care about.
2). Console generations are typically longer, than graphics card generations. This gives the developers more time and experience with the hardware, and the ability to do amazing things on it a few years after its launch that no one thought possible at launch. And these innovations are available to everyone who bought the console, not just those that decided they have the money to spend on 8 nVidia cards running at once.
3). There are plenty of "low-end" systems out there; they are called handhelds, and there is some terrific innovation going on there in trying to get more graphics power from their already limited processors. Take Square-Enix, for example. When they ported Final Fantasy III to the DS, they wanted to include some FMV cutscenes. Unfortunately, the processor for the top screen wasn't powerful enough to draw it alone. So they innovated, and brought in the processor for the bottom screen to help.
First you say that Dwarf Fortress couldn't not exist on a console, then you laud it for its portability. Wouldn't that portability lend itself to being ported to a console?
About the only point that still stands is the modability of PC games, which I will concede. Most developers are quite good at packaging the same tools they used to create the game, and giving them to the community at release or shortly after.
I think cor- persons is some kind of bastard child of a corporation and a person. As in, the gp was trying to say something about corporate personhood.
Well, most music today is mixed so that it sounds ok on what 90% of people will listen to it on: The shitty earbuds that come with the iPod and most other mp3 players.
If all you're doing is "simple picture manipulation," then you don't need Adobe CS. You would served just fine by their consumer product, Photoshop Elements, or even better, by some of the free photo editors out there, like Paint.NET or GiMP.
You know there's a lot more to producing a CD than just stamping out the disk and printing some liner notes, right? There's studio time to rent, there's audio engineers to pay, promotion of the band.
Interesting tidbit: In the Declaration of Independence, where it says that all men have a right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness," they originally were going to put Property in there as well. However, several of the delegates got it taken out, as they felt that it would have encouraged the ever spreading practice of slavery.
That's the problem: People who pirate things may be acting with their dollars and getting the attention of the higher ups in the company, but in a bad way. Piracy is one of the reasons they are asking for tougher anti-piracy laws, coming up with stricter DRM, and in general making things worse for those of us who do pay for stuff.
Like someone earlier here said: If you're gonna pirate, go ahead. We won't stop you, and probably couldn't if we wanted to. But don't pretend like you're doing us all a favor, or fighting some kind of crusade for our rights. You just don't want to pay $30 for the audio book.
If you're relying on a consultant for support like that, and his actions cause the BSA to bring the hammer down on you, wouldn't the consultant be liable?
Except when too many people pirate the application/game, then the company doesn't make enough money, and then they have to let people go. These people, now unemployed, are a real drain on the economy, as they can't afford to buy food or clothing or pay rent. Some may find a new job, but a significant portion will find themselves either perpetually out of work, or working the midnight shift at 7-11.
Granted, I took the argument to an extreme, but no more than your claim that piracy "Helps the economy."
Slashdot Mirror
The Free in FOSS doesn't necessarily refer to its costs. The Free typically means that you are Free to take the software, see how it works, modify it to fit your needs, and distribute your improvements and changes to others.
Ah, but isn't another Pillar of Libertarianism the right to personal property and defense of that property? I know I've discussed with people on here and other sites whenever an RIAA story comes out, that the artists (read: Labels) have a right to their property, both real and intellectual, and so their copyright on the song (or book or whatever) should continue indefinitely, and should be allowed to pass on to their children, and children's children, and so on.
The thing is, signing a petition is a show of support for a particular cause, not just a show of support for the rights of people to vote on things. And again, if enough people that actually believe in the cause can't be found to sign the petition, then it doesn't bode well for your chances of winning an election.
Well, I believe that the petition is the part where those who strongly believe that the status quo should be changed (or feel really strongly that it should remain the same), and want a decision made on it. The election is for those people who, initially probably have no strong feelings one way or the other, but hearing both sides of the issue make up their mind how they feel.
According to that law, you'd have to wait til you're 62. Either that or marry someone's grandparent.
The line that most people think repeals the law is when Jesus says, "I have not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it." (Matthew 5:17). However, in the early days of the Catholic Church, the question came up as to who could become Catholic. Specifically, if someone wanted to join the Church, was it necessary for them to be Jewish first, and observe all the things that came with it, like being circumcised and observing Jewish dietary restrictions. Since it was decided that no, one doesn't have to be Jewish before being Christian, many of the things in the Torah were no longer observed. One could argue this would include the ban on homosexuality (which really stems from the commandment Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery).
Except no one is trying to force gay marriage on religions. Churches currently have the right to refuse to perform a marriage if they don't believe the two participants will live a lifestyle consistent with that church's beliefs, and they continue to have that right where gay marriage is legal. What a church does not have the right to do is actually perform a gay marriage if they so wish. And yes, there are several Christian churches that are perfectly fine with performing a gay marriage.
A fundamentally apathetic person probably wouldn't be signing a petition. And if you don't feel that strongly one way or another on the issue to have your name associated with either side, then maybe you shouldn't sign the petition, and wait for it to come up to the ballot where you can express your support for the issue in private.
If you don't want your name associated with the cause, then don't sign the petition. A petition only needs a small percentage of the registered voters to get something on the ballot for a reason. And if your cause can't even find that many people willing to stand up and proclaim what you believe in, then maybe that's a good indicator that your position does not have the levels of support needed to win.
Historically, there have been reasons why the actual votes someone casts in an election are kept private. In some parts of the world, if it gets out that you voted for Candidate X, then that could mean you've just lost your house, your land, and your family. I'd like to think the US is not one of those places, however there can be other bad things that happen to you if it comes out that you voted one way on something when you'd rather keep that private.
Now a public petition is another thing, as these things need to be verified that the people that actually signed it exist, and wanted to sign it.
You probably were joking, but I do think that every degree has value. People studying women's studies, LGBT studies, black studies are just as important to society as those studying physics, math, and engineering. The people in the second group are helping to increase our society's understanding of the physical universe, and increase our level of technology. That's good. However, the people in the first group are helping to increase our understanding of ourselves. Why we think the way we do; what really makes us tick. And I think that's just as valuable as figuring out how to use technology to be able to visit a webpage while I shit on a device that fits in the palm of my hand.
I don't see how that is a negative point; its the same argument used in favor of the consoles. If I know that everyone has the same stuff, then I know that everyone is going to get the same experience, and that makes it easier on me. While differing phones having a common platform makes it easier for software to be ported between them, don't you still really need access to each phone for testing on each of them?
I have to ask: I've been programming Objective C off and on for a few years now (around the time they switched to Intel), and while Objective C 2 brought a lot of good stuff with it, is dot notation really that big of a deal?
1). I don't really care about innovations done for "scalability" done for PCs. With a console, you know exactly what everyone has, therefore you can optimize your art assets, audio assets, and your engine to run on that specific hardware. With a PC, you're wasting time trying to figure out how to dynamically determine if this player has obscure graphics feature C and dealing with turning it on or off. That's time that could be spent on real innovations, such as gameplay, that the "market" (players) actually care about.
2). Console generations are typically longer, than graphics card generations. This gives the developers more time and experience with the hardware, and the ability to do amazing things on it a few years after its launch that no one thought possible at launch. And these innovations are available to everyone who bought the console, not just those that decided they have the money to spend on 8 nVidia cards running at once.
3). There are plenty of "low-end" systems out there; they are called handhelds, and there is some terrific innovation going on there in trying to get more graphics power from their already limited processors. Take Square-Enix, for example. When they ported Final Fantasy III to the DS, they wanted to include some FMV cutscenes. Unfortunately, the processor for the top screen wasn't powerful enough to draw it alone. So they innovated, and brought in the processor for the bottom screen to help.
First you say that Dwarf Fortress couldn't not exist on a console, then you laud it for its portability. Wouldn't that portability lend itself to being ported to a console?
About the only point that still stands is the modability of PC games, which I will concede. Most developers are quite good at packaging the same tools they used to create the game, and giving them to the community at release or shortly after.
As long as people are involved in some way, no.
What do you have in state Income tax?
I think cor- persons is some kind of bastard child of a corporation and a person. As in, the gp was trying to say something about corporate personhood.
Well, most music today is mixed so that it sounds ok on what 90% of people will listen to it on: The shitty earbuds that come with the iPod and most other mp3 players.
A friend of mine has one of these. He's got Close Encounters, and half of Superman II.
If all you're doing is "simple picture manipulation," then you don't need Adobe CS. You would served just fine by their consumer product, Photoshop Elements, or even better, by some of the free photo editors out there, like Paint.NET or GiMP.
You know there's a lot more to producing a CD than just stamping out the disk and printing some liner notes, right? There's studio time to rent, there's audio engineers to pay, promotion of the band.
Interesting tidbit: In the Declaration of Independence, where it says that all men have a right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness," they originally were going to put Property in there as well. However, several of the delegates got it taken out, as they felt that it would have encouraged the ever spreading practice of slavery.
That's the problem: People who pirate things may be acting with their dollars and getting the attention of the higher ups in the company, but in a bad way. Piracy is one of the reasons they are asking for tougher anti-piracy laws, coming up with stricter DRM, and in general making things worse for those of us who do pay for stuff.
Like someone earlier here said: If you're gonna pirate, go ahead. We won't stop you, and probably couldn't if we wanted to. But don't pretend like you're doing us all a favor, or fighting some kind of crusade for our rights. You just don't want to pay $30 for the audio book.
If you're relying on a consultant for support like that, and his actions cause the BSA to bring the hammer down on you, wouldn't the consultant be liable?
Except when too many people pirate the application/game, then the company doesn't make enough money, and then they have to let people go. These people, now unemployed, are a real drain on the economy, as they can't afford to buy food or clothing or pay rent. Some may find a new job, but a significant portion will find themselves either perpetually out of work, or working the midnight shift at 7-11.
Granted, I took the argument to an extreme, but no more than your claim that piracy "Helps the economy."