Posted on 10/10/2006 4:56:51 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
Linux or open source seems to thrive wherever Left governments rule. And as Kerala schools log Microsoft out and boot open source systems, Linux world is buzzing with excitement over possibilities in the communist-ruled states. Though West Bengal and Tripura have to go whole hog to adopt a free software model, ideological closeness is more than evident. Kerala, most insiders’ feel, is turning out to be Richard Stallman's happiest hunting ground. His personal vibes with Velikakathu Sankaran Achuthanandan, even from VS's pre-chief minister era, are in play. It’s a picture watching the duo cozying together in a similar attire — Stallman in a crumbled white T-shirt and VS in homely sleeveless white banian. Secretly, people do wonder what Class VII drop-out Marxist patriarch chitchats with whiz-kid of the Red Hat business-model. However, those who attended a Stallman seminar on FOSS, could clearly see that Linux and Left are on the same wavelength.
(Excerpt) Read more at financialexpress.com ...
1. Nope.
2. Nope.
Those companies, like most in IT, have sufferred due to obsolescence and their failure to adapt to new technological developments.
There are two ways to overcome such pressures:
1. Develop and adapt (good)
2. Control the market (bad)
You're not making sense. Without Linux, BSD would probably be on those servers, and available to foreign governments too due to the even more permissible license. BSD was out, and going, but a lawsuit held them up just long enough for Linux to grab the attention of the worldwide developer community. This would be a different world if not for that lawsuit.
Again, you attack Linux, but your gripe is with the concept of open software.
No it wouldn't the legality of these BSD's was in question long before linux. Legality of open source will always be in question, because it is contrary to our normal laws of business, and that is why there needs to be greater controls.
Who's giving them supercomputer products? Last I heard they bought them. Or do you just mean the free OS? But you've already said it's okay for Microsoft to sell them Cluster Server to run their supercomputers. You claim a big national security problem, but we know that for you national security has a relatively cheap price tag.
Giving technology away to our worldwide competitors is not a wise move, it is not a normal action in any other industry. The international open source crowd has its eyes on our drug advancements as well, I certainly hope you don't think we should give those intellectual property rights away as well?
Ridiculous, nowhere have I ever said that nor will I. I simply said if we agree we shouldn't even sell them the technology, how could you possibly want to give it to them for free, instead. It's obviously just another case of you talking in circles, as you always do whenever the topic is dicussed.
Not long before. It started a year before Linux was released, and was resolved (soundly in free software's favor) two years after Linux, when Linux had already gained a large following.
Legality of open source will always be in question
In order to do that, you have to put our concept of copyright in question. Why don't you rant at Sun for the questionable legality of OpenSolaris?
Everyone knew the BSD lawsuit was coming years before it ever actually did, just as we knew the Linux lawsuit was coming, years before it ever actually did. This isn't one of these college kids you're talking to, quit trying to BS.
Plenty of the intellectual elements in our economy are considered public domain. Perhaps the majority of the most essential ones (alphabet, words, phrases, numerics and mathematics, etc.)
The international open source crowd has its eyes on our drug advancements as well, I certainly hope you don't think we should give those intellectual property rights away as well?
Don't get me started about the immorality of the "just how much are your life and health worth?" racketeering, in our healthcare industry, especially in insurance, litigation, and yes, pharmaceuticals, where patents all too often trump concern for patients.
Is that a yes, you feel the U.S. should give our medical secrets away to the rest of the world for free?
Do you believe poor people who are sick and dying should be helped?
The economy should support those involved in healthcare in ways that reward true interest their having the greatest impact upon human health, not in exorbitant profiteering upon people's misfortunes. Period.
I believe it is important that they help themselves first. But if they are not able to help themselves, they should be helped, but they should not expect they will receive better treatment than those who have better prepared for the inevitable circumstance.
not in exorbitant profiteering upon people's misfortunes
Not giving something away for free can't possibly be considered "exorbitant profiteering" can it?
No, not necessarily. And it's true in healthcare as elsewhere that one "shouldn't muzzle the ox that pulls harvest cart."
But the economics of healthcare are skewed way beyond that, so the ox is eating more grain than is healthy and the people don't get (or share) what they could.
Economics are a vital part of a healthy society, but only a part. Economic interest is far from the greatest interest (a failing for both Adam Smith and Karl Marx, it would seem).
That's all well and good, I agree, but I don't agree that providing the world's society with its needs is the responsibility of the U.S. The U.S. society should be it's focus, and endlessly sharing the wealth of the U.S. with the rest of the world is actually contrary to that goal. Let's at least pay off our debts, and reach a point of peace before we start giving our riches away.
Hey! Thanks for the tag line!
He thinks Planned Parenthood's sole mission is to prevent AIDS in Africa and backs Microsoft's donations to them wholeheartedly. Does that count?
The first time I saw that picture, I nearly died laughing.
Absolutely. The new Cray stuff is pretty cool, even though they are now using commodity CPUs. They have a lot of experience tying multiple processors together with wicked fast backplanes. I recall seeing some stuff about their design process and it's pretty cool. If Cray can benefit from the cost reductions and economies of scale that are facilitated by using OTS components, they should continue to do o.k. They probably won't regain their previous stature of being the best supercomputer on the planet, but if they can't keep up, then they don't deserve it anyway. I always wanted one of those Cray computers that look like a round couch. :-)
LOL funny watching you pull that one out of your rear, ye burning man of death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.