I don't think that the porn world would like this, but for me... well high quality adult pictures hey, haven't seen that too much on the net.. Could Microsoft get into trouble with Net Authority? --
So what do Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch have in common? They own the distribution, or the 'face' of the information distribution into the rest of the world.
Talks break down.
Microsoft is *not* activating smart tags at this very moment. They will in later versions when all complaints by all parties are settled. At this moment they do not have the diplomatic time to settle all differences. -> Read this bit in an article in my own (non English) language.
So Internet Explorer (Gates) is going to be like commercial television (Murdoch).
Smart tags are going to be a form for providing commercial information - not necesary Microsoft information because that would mean a monopolistic action. So Microsoft could be paid to (unwanted) link to your site using a smart tag, like commercial television provides (unwanted) commercial information on tha telly.
So what is the difference between Gates and Murdoch? Well, not every browser has smart tags. How will Microsoft prevent you from being exposed to Smart Tags in IE? Simple - Hailstorm - the passport system, you won't be allowed to use Netscape for some utter bullshit reason they can think of. --
8. Are your obligations under the GPL "flexible" or "proportional" to your use of GPL code? Suppose Business A uses a few hundred lines of GPL code in its existing 500,000-line proprietary program and makes copies for its own employees or distributes ten copies of the modified program as a collective work. Suppose Business B combines 500,000 lines of GPL code with an existing 1000-line proprietary program and distributes 500,000 copies of the modified program as a collective work. The GPL may be read as to require both businesses to share the source code for their modified programs (including their existing commercial programs) and allow royalty-free redistribution of those programs. This is true despite the potentially dramatic differences in the volume, value and copies of the GPL code used.
Yep, they still don't have a clue what GPL is, so any discussion remains a waste of time. --
The mindless MS-bashing is indeed not the road I want to walk. But on the other hand, Bill Gates is saying some stuff which has some intellectual background. My guess is (agreeing with the above poster) that the whole point is about the fact that OSS cannot be acquired. Perhaps that's Bill's main problem, because acquiring propriaty software means that the way they protect their business model can remain the same, while differentiating in their product line. So My guess is that Bill Gates is making a Business statement, rather than a legal or technical statement. --
Is gates actually attacking OSS here? I quote: "The ecosystem where you have free software and commercial software--and customers always get to decide which they use--that's a very important and healthy ecosystem," Gates said.
Isn't Gates saying the same thing here as Thorvalds? "There should be choice?" or don't I et the point?
The GPL, he continued, "breaks that cycle--that is, it makes it impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or build on any of that work."
Why does Gates think things like this, I mean, it is possible to use OSS for operating system, web-server etc, but this does not have to be true for software development using libraries?
It is clear to me that Gates is not attacking Open Source Software here, well not in the way Ballmer did, but just doing his bit in the argument. I would prefer him to be more precise. Maybe we should try to 'open' discussion between MS and OSS techs and discover which problems Microsoft encountered when they started using open source. --
In Holland, the shower of speeding tickets has caused a social spiral in which civil violence against anything having authority has escalated. If they give us speeding tickets via a big brother system, then someone is going to pay.
It is all about the simple fact that:
* Laws are choices, and laws can be changed
* "Speed-control" is not in any way a proven strategy for traffic-safety
* "Speed-control" is not in any way a cause to encourage traffic-safety, it is just a way to collect money (ie tickets)
Within our civilization we have certain different people:
* "It's the best for us" - people whom trust the government;
* "Well I wouldn't speed if the fine is so high" - people whom are scared;
* "Well I'll speed as I want to" - they compulsive anarchist, or maybe some other form of anti-governmental protesting;
Fact is that a car gives freedom, and limiting speed is taking away freedom, this is the social problem with speed, ie nobody wants unsafe roads right?
The government is all about power, here in Holland we see that our government doesn't have the power they want, so via speeding tickets they try "to do something for a good cause" while becoming obscenely rich, and proving their power to civilization. The GPS system found in the above article is for rental cars, here in Holland they want to introduce a license plate with a chip. This chip makes contact with all sorts of electronic devices, but you know what's going to happen here. First we pay extra fines because we drive on a highway at the wrong moment (a policy against heavy traffic), then they check the distance we've drivven (important for taxes), then they check what speed we make.
At this moment, guns are highly forbidden within our country, but I'm sure if these big brother systems are introduced, a lot of police people are going to die, I'm not in favour of this, but this is the way it works here. --
why is one theory "patched up" and the other accepted as true
Uhm, wouldn't this just be a simple incident of a journalist trying to transform scientific logic into human readable story?
You know, journalists don't really have to obey the laws of logic in the purest form possible, that's why they are called "journalists", and why they're not called "scientists" --
I believe that old manuscripts and ancient documents are now being digitized for conservation. The old books detoriate due to all sorts of factors, bacteria, fungus etc.
Now I read about CD eating bacteria, even about CD's detoriating by themselves, so, is there perhaps an alternative for storage with a longer life? --
I've read this story a few days ago, unfortunately not in english, it is said that this fungus does not only eat the shiny bits away, it also eats the transparent plastic away. Secondly, the extreme conditions are said to be found *mainly* in places like Africa. Still, this new fungus means again that the human race cannot beat mother nature... --
Gold doesn't corrode, it does not rust. While most metals corrode, Gold does not. Silver does, (not particularly with oxygen). So Gold is a trustworthy metal, cultural influences have given gold the meaning of value and trust. Printed money is still artifical. It does not cost you 100 dollars to make a printed paperbill of 100 dollar (paper and ink), the material form of the money is very much cheaper than the value it represents. Gold is gold, there is an exchange rate between any currency and gold, but gold 1 gram gold actually costs 1 gram of gold. This never changes, even when your country decides to drop their currency a use a new one (ie the Euro). --
We've seen a lot of e-money initiatives. Perhaps PayPal is the biggest player in this area. I worked on a project which was to re-introduce PayPal into Europe in some partnership form. We also discussed things like having Gold as the global currency, and some interesting arguments were given.
A new currency will never be accepted by all banks all over the world, gold is not only the oldest money around, it is also a global currency. The U.S. dollar is not a global currency as in some parts of the world it is even an 'illegal' currency (ie Iraq, China), so gold is accepted everywhere. Problem is the exchange rate between your local currency en the gold currency. Also the right to own gold and trade with gold is something which differs among different countries. PayPal is the biggest player in E-Money, I understand that even the CityBank is scared is hell from PayPal (and I'm not even a U.S. citizen!). PayPal has a working concept, it is very unlikely that a competitor in E-Money will survive. --
I didn't even finish reading the article, understanding the consequences. I actually live in the Hague (Holland) and we have an expression for this:
kankazooi
Which really means "big mess" in very unpolite and obscene terms.
The Hague treaty means "sue all the world", and it means that Europeans can be prosecuted for silly U.S laws. I think if it goes that way, this could cause social disruption.
Every country has its own culture and its own values. Those values are often enforced by law, attacking people under national safe-law within a country with outside hostile-law is the same thing as attacking the country as a whole.
Internet Explorer already told me which sites weren't approved by Microsoft, scaring me such that I would not visit such a hacker site. After attacking the obvious enemy, they're now attacking the subtle enemy with those smart tags? --
They did. Globalization is the process to fight poverty in third world countries. I watched a very interesting documentory on this topic about one year ago.
Changing the rules have not only re-slaved the people, it has also recolonized "poor" countries. Take an example for India. A small village had its own traditions for ages, the men did some farming, the women fetched water from a lake. One day Mr. World Bank comes and tells the village people to import their food, and stay away from the lake as Coca Cola has bought it. Most people will say - well hey, there's nothing wrong with change and this is the way the world bank thinks.
The problem is that in processes like these, we pay attention to wealth, but we ignore emotion. In the world of globalization, emotion is unimportant, emotion is killed by logic. So is there nothing wrong with change then?
Emotion is important for well-being, but a lot of people do not care about this. Fortunately there are quite a lot of people still who do care. Those are the protesters who'll hit the streets when there's one of those World Trade conferences.
Another thing is, that the first world has an economic system, in this system it is all about demand and supply. Probably everybody has some item, economically completely woorthless, but which has emotional priceless value, ie a cheap necklace of your deceased mother. The supply/demand system has been projected onto the systems of third world countries, the emotional priceless became worhtless. So our first world system has become a method of proof that those 'poor' countries are actually poor. I suppose if we'd use a different system to measure, those countries aren't poor at all.
Reconolization has happened in Uganda. First the World Bank sends money to the government (a loan), invests in hydrolautical power plants and so on, but there is a cultural problem with wealth. In the first world, people walk fast, speed with their cars and are hyperactive especially when there is money in their game. The Ugandian people do not have such life-rythmns. With a shortage on efforts (cultural problem, they're not used to it), many investment projects failed. The governmental tax income was less then the interest the country had to pay for the loans to the world bank. Uganda is bankrupt.
From the people who invested in Uganda, nobody actually cared about their culture. The undereducated people did not understand what was happening, they still do not understand that they to pay an effort to build their country. Meanwhile, Uganda has become private property of the world bank and obscene wealthy corporates.
The only way this can be changed is when people massively value their own emotions. Logic can be fought with emotion, you just need to pay attention and not let yourself to be pushed of your track. --
Small errand here - you try to buy a naked PC, ie try to spend your money without Microsoft getting a dime, voting is hard...
You try to buy recording media, without the RIAA getting a dime (ever heard of compensation tax? do you have that too in your country?)
You try to not-consume at all, but the kids have to go to school and that costs money, you try to grow your own crops, and you'l still pay taxes. Everything is connected, voting with your wallet is not possible. --
Freenet huh? I suppose anyone proven to run a Freenet node, even though it's in RAM, must be doing something illegal. I get the feeling that the innocent-until-guilty clause does not apply anymore. Any reasonable doubt should set one free, but the clause does not apply for good faith anymore - you probably heard that Canadian story about patent infringement with some sort of crop/flower, it seemed that the bio-industry has his own laws, and the farmer had to pay up, i cannot find a link at the moment.
Everything I read these days is about power and control, it looks like a person cannot do anything anymore without tresspassing some law, I mean, if there were a police officer following me all the time, I'd be bankrupt and imprisoned as hell! Laws are meant to take away your freedom, it is freenet's intention to give you more freedom, one way or another - this will not be allowed, if they can't sue you, they'll shoot you. --
I wonder what the legal consequences are here. Previous experiences with other projects taught me that U.S. law does not apply elsewhere in the world. I know that privacy laws, copyright laws etc. are different in Europe for example. I also know that what Microsoft is doing here, does not extrapolate U.S. laws to other parts of the world - i.e. if MS is denying European laws on privacy, U.S. authorities will be forced to take actions against Microsoft and don't underestimate this.
Other problems are distance and trust. European authorities give advice not to do business with U.S. companies via the internet. If some big-shot corporate on the other side of the world is holding my identity, I think that's quite riscy, and you can be sure this will have political attention.
My guess is that the Hailstorm plan wil endevour a lot of resistance, from non-US corporates, from non-US legal departments and from non-US politicians. Still, the world is ever bigger than Microsoft or even the US. I'm not affraid of the concept, we won't buy it. --
1. Pay anonymously
2. (DM won't work, they will introduce Euro's!) Europe wide, a thing PayPal has problems with (I worked on a project to reintroduce PayPal into Europe, it failed!)
3. Trustworthy systems and E-Money could help the new economy out of their misery, dot.coms just need customers right?
4. European idea, somehow someway, Europeans like it in their own way, no offence to US citizens
And we all know that begging is not really a viable business model
I heard there are beggars/tramps/drug junkies making more money than me, perhaps in the order of 2500 U.S. Dollars or 2100 Euro per month. This is ofcourse without the tax reduction, but as the tax reduction is not applied, this is their net monthly income.
In third world countires begging is even more lucrative, as mature man usually mutulate childrens limbs (ie break them permanently) in order to make them even look worse:( , such that they make more money. Practices like this are mostly performend in countries like India:( . Perhaps if we would artificially disable children and send them onto the street here in the first world, we would make even more money than the ordinary tramp.
I am like this I guess. I am not responsible for a business model, so they cannot blame me for downloading an ISO donating nothing. On the other hand donation can be good help for them, as long as I get a little piece of control - well I think that's fair because I'm willing to trust a tech, but I won't trust a sales/marketing guy, not even in the OpenSource world. In my opinion, the Mandrake deal is good, if I am to choose where the money goes, I get more motivated for donation. The way they *present* their request for donation is a PR thing, maybe they could do better on that. --
While this news report is very likely just a measurement error, we must be reminded that the last time we discovered an error in a celestial body's trajectory we reinvented the notion of the universe.
Quite a harsh statement. My guess is that we should seek an answer in meta-physics, that introduce-another-dimension-stuff, or call it "space and matter and energy are consequence of undetectible lower level entities". Maybe one can adjust gravitational laws.
--
Slashdot Mirror
Kitty porn!. Second hit when you type porn...
--
I don't think that the porn world would like this, but for me... well high quality adult pictures hey, haven't seen that too much on the net.. Could Microsoft get into trouble with Net Authority?
--
Talks break down.
Microsoft is *not* activating smart tags at this very moment. They will in later versions when all complaints by all parties are settled. At this moment they do not have the diplomatic time to settle all differences. -> Read this bit in an article in my own (non English) language.
So Internet Explorer (Gates) is going to be like commercial television (Murdoch).
Smart tags are going to be a form for providing commercial information - not necesary Microsoft information because that would mean a monopolistic action. So Microsoft could be paid to (unwanted) link to your site using a smart tag, like commercial television provides (unwanted) commercial information on tha telly.
So what is the difference between Gates and Murdoch? Well, not every browser has smart tags. How will Microsoft prevent you from being exposed to Smart Tags in IE? Simple - Hailstorm - the passport system, you won't be allowed to use Netscape for some utter bullshit reason they can think of.
--
Of course, this stops anyone from using a client not published by Napster.
Uhm, does this stop GNapster as well? Gotta try this at home...
--
I quote from a Word Document published by Microsoft the following:
8. Are your obligations under the GPL "flexible" or "proportional" to your use of GPL code?
Suppose Business A uses a few hundred lines of GPL code in its existing 500,000-line proprietary program and makes copies for its own employees or distributes ten copies of the modified program as a collective work. Suppose Business B combines 500,000 lines of GPL code with an existing 1000-line proprietary program and distributes 500,000 copies of the modified program as a collective work. The GPL may be read as to require both businesses to share the source code for their modified programs (including their existing commercial programs) and allow royalty-free redistribution of those programs. This is true despite the potentially dramatic differences in the volume, value and copies of the GPL code used.
Yep, they still don't have a clue what GPL is, so any discussion remains a waste of time.
--
The mindless MS-bashing is indeed not the road I want to walk. But on the other hand, Bill Gates is saying some stuff which has some intellectual background. My guess is (agreeing with the above poster) that the whole point is about the fact that OSS cannot be acquired. Perhaps that's Bill's main problem, because acquiring propriaty software means that the way they protect their business model can remain the same, while differentiating in their product line. So My guess is that Bill Gates is making a Business statement, rather than a legal or technical statement.
--
"The ecosystem where you have free software and commercial software--and customers always get to decide which they use--that's a very important and healthy ecosystem," Gates said.
Isn't Gates saying the same thing here as Thorvalds? "There should be choice?" or don't I et the point?
The GPL, he continued, "breaks that cycle--that is, it makes it impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or build on any of that work."
Why does Gates think things like this, I mean, it is possible to use OSS for operating system, web-server etc, but this does not have to be true for software development using libraries?
It is clear to me that Gates is not attacking Open Source Software here, well not in the way Ballmer did, but just doing his bit in the argument. I would prefer him to be more precise. Maybe we should try to 'open' discussion between MS and OSS techs and discover which problems Microsoft encountered when they started using open source.
--
It is all about the simple fact that:
* Laws are choices, and laws can be changed
* "Speed-control" is not in any way a proven strategy for traffic-safety
* "Speed-control" is not in any way a cause to encourage traffic-safety, it is just a way to collect money (ie tickets)
Within our civilization we have certain different people:
* "It's the best for us" - people whom trust the government;
* "Well I wouldn't speed if the fine is so high" - people whom are scared;
* "Well I'll speed as I want to" - they compulsive anarchist, or maybe some other form of anti-governmental protesting;
Fact is that a car gives freedom, and limiting speed is taking away freedom, this is the social problem with speed, ie nobody wants unsafe roads right?
The government is all about power, here in Holland we see that our government doesn't have the power they want, so via speeding tickets they try "to do something for a good cause" while becoming obscenely rich, and proving their power to civilization. The GPS system found in the above article is for rental cars, here in Holland they want to introduce a license plate with a chip. This chip makes contact with all sorts of electronic devices, but you know what's going to happen here. First we pay extra fines because we drive on a highway at the wrong moment (a policy against heavy traffic), then they check the distance we've drivven (important for taxes), then they check what speed we make.
At this moment, guns are highly forbidden within our country, but I'm sure if these big brother systems are introduced, a lot of police people are going to die, I'm not in favour of this, but this is the way it works here.
--
Uhm, wouldn't this just be a simple incident of a journalist trying to transform scientific logic into human readable story?
You know, journalists don't really have to obey the laws of logic in the purest form possible, that's why they are called "journalists", and why they're not called "scientists"
--
Now I read about CD eating bacteria, even about CD's detoriating by themselves, so, is there perhaps an alternative for storage with a longer life?
--
I've read this story a few days ago, unfortunately not in english, it is said that this fungus does not only eat the shiny bits away, it also eats the transparent plastic away. Secondly, the extreme conditions are said to be found *mainly* in places like Africa. Still, this new fungus means again that the human race cannot beat mother nature...
--
Gold doesn't corrode, it does not rust. While most metals corrode, Gold does not. Silver does, (not particularly with oxygen). So Gold is a trustworthy metal, cultural influences have given gold the meaning of value and trust. Printed money is still artifical. It does not cost you 100 dollars to make a printed paperbill of 100 dollar (paper and ink), the material form of the money is very much cheaper than the value it represents. Gold is gold, there is an exchange rate between any currency and gold, but gold 1 gram gold actually costs 1 gram of gold. This never changes, even when your country decides to drop their currency a use a new one (ie the Euro).
--
A new currency will never be accepted by all banks all over the world, gold is not only the oldest money around, it is also a global currency. The U.S. dollar is not a global currency as in some parts of the world it is even an 'illegal' currency (ie Iraq, China), so gold is accepted everywhere. Problem is the exchange rate between your local currency en the gold currency. Also the right to own gold and trade with gold is something which differs among different countries. PayPal is the biggest player in E-Money, I understand that even the CityBank is scared is hell from PayPal (and I'm not even a U.S. citizen!). PayPal has a working concept, it is very unlikely that a competitor in E-Money will survive.
--
Space quests are still risky, certainly when it's beyond Pluto, furthermore, why would I want some jack-ass alien to clone me?
--
kankazooi
Which really means "big mess" in very unpolite and obscene terms.
The Hague treaty means "sue all the world", and it means that Europeans can be prosecuted for silly U.S laws. I think if it goes that way, this could cause social disruption.
Every country has its own culture and its own values. Those values are often enforced by law, attacking people under national safe-law within a country with outside hostile-law is the same thing as attacking the country as a whole.
This treaty is one big sucker.
--
Internet Explorer already told me which sites weren't approved by Microsoft, scaring me such that I would not visit such a hacker site. After attacking the obvious enemy, they're now attacking the subtle enemy with those smart tags?
--
I heard that that inventor friend of Donald Duck once invented water in the form of powder.
--
They did. Globalization is the process to fight poverty in third world countries. I watched a very interesting documentory on this topic about one year ago.
Changing the rules have not only re-slaved the people, it has also recolonized "poor" countries. Take an example for India. A small village had its own traditions for ages, the men did some farming, the women fetched water from a lake. One day Mr. World Bank comes and tells the village people to import their food, and stay away from the lake as Coca Cola has bought it. Most people will say - well hey, there's nothing wrong with change and this is the way the world bank thinks.
The problem is that in processes like these, we pay attention to wealth, but we ignore emotion. In the world of globalization, emotion is unimportant, emotion is killed by logic. So is there nothing wrong with change then?
Emotion is important for well-being, but a lot of people do not care about this. Fortunately there are quite a lot of people still who do care. Those are the protesters who'll hit the streets when there's one of those World Trade conferences.
Another thing is, that the first world has an economic system, in this system it is all about demand and supply. Probably everybody has some item, economically completely woorthless, but which has emotional priceless value, ie a cheap necklace of your deceased mother. The supply/demand system has been projected onto the systems of third world countries, the emotional priceless became worhtless. So our first world system has become a method of proof that those 'poor' countries are actually poor. I suppose if we'd use a different system to measure, those countries aren't poor at all.
Reconolization has happened in Uganda. First the World Bank sends money to the government (a loan), invests in hydrolautical power plants and so on, but there is a cultural problem with wealth. In the first world, people walk fast, speed with their cars and are hyperactive especially when there is money in their game. The Ugandian people do not have such life-rythmns. With a shortage on efforts (cultural problem, they're not used to it), many investment projects failed. The governmental tax income was less then the interest the country had to pay for the loans to the world bank. Uganda is bankrupt.
From the people who invested in Uganda, nobody actually cared about their culture. The undereducated people did not understand what was happening, they still do not understand that they to pay an effort to build their country. Meanwhile, Uganda has become private property of the world bank and obscene wealthy corporates.
The only way this can be changed is when people massively value their own emotions. Logic can be fought with emotion, you just need to pay attention and not let yourself to be pushed of your track.
--
Small errand here - you try to buy a naked PC, ie try to spend your money without Microsoft getting a dime, voting is hard...
You try to buy recording media, without the RIAA getting a dime (ever heard of compensation tax? do you have that too in your country?)
You try to not-consume at all, but the kids have to go to school and that costs money, you try to grow your own crops, and you'l still pay taxes. Everything is connected, voting with your wallet is not possible.
--
Everything I read these days is about power and control, it looks like a person cannot do anything anymore without tresspassing some law, I mean, if there were a police officer following me all the time, I'd be bankrupt and imprisoned as hell! Laws are meant to take away your freedom, it is freenet's intention to give you more freedom, one way or another - this will not be allowed, if they can't sue you, they'll shoot you.
--
Other problems are distance and trust. European authorities give advice not to do business with U.S. companies via the internet. If some big-shot corporate on the other side of the world is holding my identity, I think that's quite riscy, and you can be sure this will have political attention.
My guess is that the Hailstorm plan wil endevour a lot of resistance, from non-US corporates, from non-US legal departments and from non-US politicians. Still, the world is ever bigger than Microsoft or even the US. I'm not affraid of the concept, we won't buy it.
--
1. Pay anonymously
2. (DM won't work, they will introduce Euro's!) Europe wide, a thing PayPal has problems with (I worked on a project to reintroduce PayPal into Europe, it failed!)
3. Trustworthy systems and E-Money could help the new economy out of their misery, dot.coms just need customers right?
4. European idea, somehow someway, Europeans like it in their own way, no offence to US citizens
This is a great idea!
--
I heard there are beggars/tramps/drug junkies making more money than me, perhaps in the order of 2500 U.S. Dollars or 2100 Euro per month. This is ofcourse without the tax reduction, but as the tax reduction is not applied, this is their net monthly income.
In third world countires begging is even more lucrative, as mature man usually mutulate childrens limbs (ie break them permanently) in order to make them even look worse :( , such that they make more money. Practices like this are mostly performend in countries like India :( . Perhaps if we would artificially disable children and send them onto the street here in the first world, we would make even more money than the ordinary tramp.
Amen
--
I am like this I guess. I am not responsible for a business model, so they cannot blame me for downloading an ISO donating nothing. On the other hand donation can be good help for them, as long as I get a little piece of control - well I think that's fair because I'm willing to trust a tech, but I won't trust a sales/marketing guy, not even in the OpenSource world. In my opinion, the Mandrake deal is good, if I am to choose where the money goes, I get more motivated for donation. The way they *present* their request for donation is a PR thing, maybe they could do better on that.
--
Quite a harsh statement. My guess is that we should seek an answer in meta-physics, that introduce-another-dimension-stuff, or call it "space and matter and energy are consequence of undetectible lower level entities". Maybe one can adjust gravitational laws.
--