For instance, take the charges against Kim Schmitz (known as Kim Dotcom now). Let’s say Schmitz did have every intention/possibility of investing 50 million euros in Letsbuyit.com. If he let some know in advance (“insiders”) and they got a jump on other buyers, where’s the harm in that? Like it or not, that’s what the stock market is; a place where those who have the most accurate information the soonest, tend to win. However, Schmitz reportedly had no means/intent to invest yet reportedly pulled in enormous personal gain using his relatively small original stake ($375,000) and others he gave false information to. If so, then that’s fraud; yet he was found guilty of “insider trading” despite not having any inside information to give.

I respect the consistency of this position (“in every case”) though I disagree with its underlying premise. What I don’t understand is how anyone believing abortion is killing an innocent person can claim, in good conscience, that it’s OK if the embryo/fetus exists as a result of rape. It’s not OK to kill another person to make someone else’s bad situation marginally better.

While I’d agree with Santorum that a human life is present after conception, I disagree with Santorum’s premise that “a human life is the same as a person“. An embryo lacks the experience of complex mental activity to be considered a person. Human life that has only existed in body isn’t precious. Claiming otherwise is puzzling and I don’t see an inherent right to life for that human being. For this reason, there’s nothing unethical in a pregnant woman choosing to abort. Therefore, I support the right of women to choose and the right of doctors to help her carry out that choice safely.

Note also that Santorum slips up when he says his position “is not a matter of religious values” yet later argues that women should, “accept what God has given“. It is likely that Santorum really means “soul” but uses the term “person” to appear more secular in this matter.

The advantages of Free Software.

The advantages of Open Source Software.

However, I think a supportive infrastructure needs to be in place beforehand. This would include robust transfer payment policies for the unemployed and other vulnerable groups. As well, a public provision of health care and education that private entities are free to compete against. Unions should be limited in their ability to oppose firms that aim to improve efficiency by reducing or replacing their workforce but should be supported by laws when negotiating wage rates. I think this direction draws on some strengths of the free market and on the goal of equitable distribution of income. Flexicurity comes to mind.

A “Public” post through joindiaspora.com

A “Public” post through facebook.com

Hungary’s public administrations will by default use open document standards for their electronic documents, as of April this year, the government ministers agreed on 23 December, and all public organisations are encouraged to move to open source office tools. Hungary’s government also in December decided to cancel the funding of proprietary office suite licences for all schools.

What would make this even better would be to continue funding schools making the transition so they can better support their free software infrastructure. This would also help incentivize schools to make the switch.

A human problem is that we often think like cats or dogs.

Image source here.

Well done, ladies.

Regardless, I hope it pays off for you. It already has for Ubuntu GNU/Linux users.

The smallest doll could be thought of as the data from the sender’s application. The largest doll could be thought of as a frame, just before being turned into bits for the physical layer. Shortly thereafter, the unpacking begins until the recipient gets the smallest doll at their application layer.

To my sister Lesley who gave me this gift I say, spasiba!

Jobs saw how to make these computers stylish and smooth. That would normally be positive, but not in this case, since it has the paradoxical effect of making their controlling nature seem acceptable.

Jobs’ valuable contributions to the computing industry were more than negated. He promoted a market that has needless negative spillover effects. Sexy products are not enough to reconcile that blunder. And even worse, his attitude toward the ownership of design ideas in hardware and software are gasoline on the fire. As rms notes, the war on Android is a war that Jobs wanted waged. The full post is here.

If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today.

Countries around the world should declare software as lacking the requisites for patentability.

Update: The FICS administrators have suspended “erectpork”. No response when I asked why. I guess they don’t appreciate Peter Rock anagrams either. But now I have 3 accounts on the server. :P (Yeah, yeah…I can only use 2 but still….)

(Image source unknown. If you know, please inform me and I’ll attribute.)

“Unfortunate but necessary” is one twisted take. “Collateral” is a weapon that has been used by those who push the buttons. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against another who, when backed into a corner, becomes a vicious animal…that would be hypocritical of me. But throwing a stranger under the bus (!?) … that’s neither natural nor justified. Only the insane or duped claim otherwise.

Filed under: Uncategorized Tagged: war ]]> http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/zinn-zen/feed/ 0 gnuosphere zinn zen http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/a-technoxymoretaphor/ http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/a-technoxymoretaphor/#comments Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:26:37 +0000 petrock http://gnuosphere.wordpress.com/?p=992 ]]> Android is one of the most free prisons of this day and age.

Even if a tease, I certainly applaud the idea of an API for “HTML5 and other web standards”. For various popular phone operating systems of the day, these “App Stores” are an ugly regression.

Jobs had two stated reasons for the shift. He said Flash was a crash-prone resource hog and that it wasn’t an open standard. To a large extent, the first point is a consequence of the second. Because Flash is proprietary software developed by Adobe, third parties like Apple don’t have access to the source code or permission to change it. That means they can’t fix bugs or to optimize the code for particular devices. They have to rely on Adobe to do these things in a timely manner.

His Holiness Steve Jobs wants access and permission but doesn’t want his customers to have it. Despite the FUD, there isn’t a benefit beyond Apple’s bottom line in denying users this freedom. Communities are more than capable of protecting themselves from software vulnerabilities and can build stable systems; our track record speaks for itself. Jobs can’t claim otherwise, given that key parts of Apple’s software spring from software freedom.

I think a better balance with free software would be to license the game’s engine freely and distribute/sell the data sets under non-free licenses. Though that would irk Free Culture supporters, they’re irked either way. A free software engine can be an incredibly useful contribution to computer science and other software that puts the engine to use.

Exceedingly restrictive licensing for GNU/Linux games however, appears to be an inevitable trend in the short-run. An optimistic view sees software companies planning their long-run under the assumption that freer software licensing will offer a competitive edge and maintain profitable opportunities. If this were to happen, it may prove the OilRush model isn’t sustainable.