Luckyyyyyyy! Where I work we're forced to all have XP with the extremely boring solid blue background and to use only the standard retarded default XP programs. The problem: too many teachers thought my Suse KDE dual-monitor desktop with alternating screensaver images was amazing and wanted to have it and so complained to my boss. =P
I would have to agree. I think it's completely possible for a program to do everything that a user wants and to do it in a way as to not be cluttered. I know there are more differences between KDE and Gnome than just graphics, but in reality, it's mostly the layout/functionality that separates the two. I think it would be cool to see a layout switcher built into KDE or Gnome that would allow you to have the same layout as the other via a simple option change. If this was done, I'd guess there wouldn't be TOO much left to separate the two communities and they could work together. Sure, you can't agree on everything, so there will always be more than one program. Does anyone else think the differences between KDE and Gnome are mergable via layout customization options? I'm sure the KDE group would like the Gnome group helping them to finish KDE 4.0.:)
P.S. Actually, come to think of it, maybe one day in the future if hard drive space and internet bandwidth ever become trivial, you will only download The Program, and then tell it how you want it to be, and it'll do it, because it will be able to do anything! =D
Or how about car companies forcing you to regularly wash your car, claiming that dirty cars taint their image and thus "deprive them of profit". Seems like making any claim that something will decrease the projected profits of a company will justify making a law out of it.
...and I thought the marriage of religion and government was scary.
Trying to suggest that the GPL should thank copywrite law? That's a problem that wouldn't exist if copywrites didn't exist in the first place. There would be very little concern about "stolen code" if all code was "free" to begin with, except for the fact that not providing the sources would make things difficult, but oh well. I'm sure most people wouldn't mind doing so by their own free will though. The point is that everyone on earth would have good access to information and would no longer be traumatized by groups like the RIAA.
I love going to battle against DRM and fighting for Fair Use and even against the concept of IP and copywrites. However, even if the battle is lost, and the corporations win, and those old farts get their old idea, that information gets them money, backed by government enforement, the consumers will still get to decide in the end and ultimately come out victorious. That's why the GPL came to life, to counteract Copyrights with Copylefts. Don't like that someone is trying to legally prevent you from re-using their program or picture or (information) in a way you see fit? Go someplace else where you have that freedom, like the open source community. I don't want consumers to have to do that, but I think that's where the majority of consumers will head to when the government comes knocking to collect "copywrite infringement funds" for monopolies.
Small example: Look at newspaper comics. Penny Arcade was attacked by the old farts who make some of the comics in newspapers because the Internet has broken down their ability to make as much money as they once did. The Internet is about sharing information, so any market system which heavily depends upon the creation of information is threatened, so they go screaming to the government for help. This has happened many times before in history. Eventually those markets either dissolve or adapt. Hopefully it will happen with this, too, as long as the government isn't successful (and it's impossible to be in this case) in forcing the old market to exist, and by doing so "discourage innovation and hurt consumers".:)
Slashdot Mirror
Luckyyyyyyy! Where I work we're forced to all have XP with the extremely boring solid blue background and to use only the standard retarded default XP programs. The problem: too many teachers thought my Suse KDE dual-monitor desktop with alternating screensaver images was amazing and wanted to have it and so complained to my boss. =P
I would have to agree. I think it's completely possible for a program to do everything that a user wants and to do it in a way as to not be cluttered. I know there are more differences between KDE and Gnome than just graphics, but in reality, it's mostly the layout/functionality that separates the two. I think it would be cool to see a layout switcher built into KDE or Gnome that would allow you to have the same layout as the other via a simple option change. If this was done, I'd guess there wouldn't be TOO much left to separate the two communities and they could work together. Sure, you can't agree on everything, so there will always be more than one program. Does anyone else think the differences between KDE and Gnome are mergable via layout customization options? I'm sure the KDE group would like the Gnome group helping them to finish KDE 4.0. :)
P.S. Actually, come to think of it, maybe one day in the future if hard drive space and internet bandwidth ever become trivial, you will only download The Program, and then tell it how you want it to be, and it'll do it, because it will be able to do anything! =D
Or how about car companies forcing you to regularly wash your car, claiming that dirty cars taint their image and thus "deprive them of profit". Seems like making any claim that something will decrease the projected profits of a company will justify making a law out of it.
...and I thought the marriage of religion and government was scary.
Trying to suggest that the GPL should thank copywrite law? That's a problem that wouldn't exist if copywrites didn't exist in the first place. There would be very little concern about "stolen code" if all code was "free" to begin with, except for the fact that not providing the sources would make things difficult, but oh well. I'm sure most people wouldn't mind doing so by their own free will though. The point is that everyone on earth would have good access to information and would no longer be traumatized by groups like the RIAA.
I love going to battle against DRM and fighting for Fair Use and even against the concept of IP and copywrites. However, even if the battle is lost, and the corporations win, and those old farts get their old idea, that information gets them money, backed by government enforement, the consumers will still get to decide in the end and ultimately come out victorious. That's why the GPL came to life, to counteract Copyrights with Copylefts. Don't like that someone is trying to legally prevent you from re-using their program or picture or (information) in a way you see fit? Go someplace else where you have that freedom, like the open source community. I don't want consumers to have to do that, but I think that's where the majority of consumers will head to when the government comes knocking to collect "copywrite infringement funds" for monopolies.
Small example: Look at newspaper comics. Penny Arcade was attacked by the old farts who make some of the comics in newspapers because the Internet has broken down their ability to make as much money as they once did. The Internet is about sharing information, so any market system which heavily depends upon the creation of information is threatened, so they go screaming to the government for help. This has happened many times before in history. Eventually those markets either dissolve or adapt. Hopefully it will happen with this, too, as long as the government isn't successful (and it's impossible to be in this case) in forcing the old market to exist, and by doing so "discourage innovation and hurt consumers". :)