Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 07 August 2007 12:07 : \____
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Monday 06 August 2007 10:31 : \____
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>> ____/ [H]omer on Monday 06 August 2007 03:34 : \____
>>>>>
>>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>>>>>> ____/ Stephen Fairchild on Saturday 04 August 2007 22:28 : \____
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They can't stay with XP forever. It's from 2001. It's very outdated.
>>>>>>>>> Have you seen the depths of KDE 4 yet?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is this the same KDE 4 that's being ported to windows? Bit of an own
>>>>>>>> goal don't you think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As much as I vehemently despise Windows, KDE is Free software, and as
>>>>>> such it is not for me, you, or anyone else to dictate how it is used
>>>>>> (within the terms of the GPL). If that means someone ports it to
>>>>>> Windows, colours it bright pink, then uses it to destroy planet earth
>>>>>> ... then so be it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The reason why many people move to Linux is escape from
>>>>> lock-in/evil/viruses/whatever. If you give all killer Linux apps (even
>>>>> Compiz-fusuion) to Windows, that won't be bad for Linux adoption. Au
>>>>> contraire --- think about the main Linux adoption peril. It's the apps.
>>>>> Windows will not have the advantage of smoothly running both Linux and
>>>>> Windows apps (virtualisation aside) because people will no longer
>>>>> /require/ their
>>>>> Windows applications. It's a cyclic scenario that might take time to
>>>>> explain. Hmmm.... the debate resembles that which revolves around
>>>>> binary/OS drivers.
>>>>
>>>> Well, Peter K would have us all on binary drivers, locked to hardware
>>>> combinations determined by grey-suited people in smart offices.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not so sure about grey.
>>>
>>> "It was just a bit of text advocating open data formats that was slipped
>>> into a Florida State Senate bill at the last minute with no fanfare, but
>>> within 24 hours three Microsoft-paid lobbyists, all wearing black suits,
>>> were pressuring members of the Senate Committee on Governmental Operations
>>> (COGO) to remove the words they didn't like from Senate bill 1974. "
>>>
>>> http://enterprise.linux.com/article.pl?sid=07/04/16/2019244&from=rss
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Those'd be the chaps, yes. The risks associated with binary-only
>> software are huge, and yet, so misunderstood. It's amazing that if you
>> want to have the freedom to run your platform as you see fit, the
>> high-priests of proprietary code refer to you as a "zealot". This
>> "hit the credibility of the messenger" approach is common, of course,
>> but fails entirely to address the problem.
>
> The US has a certain lock-in the rest of the world, as well. When someone wants
> independence they call him/her "anti patriotism", they call it treason,
> anti-American, communism... whatever... just enough to get you boiling, no?
Such tactics are certainly deliberately intended to unsettle proponents
of freedom, ideally, to force them into saying or doing something they
shouldn't, and then to hold it against them as "proof" that they really
are "zealots". Of course, even when such attacks don't work, they
attacker will claim that they have anyway.
>
> Let's not start with Microsoft-government analogies because it leads to
> politics.
>
The fundamental problem here is that people come into these positions in
a very non-rational way, and are therefore unable to deal with facts
which don't fit their non-rational position. Companies like to
encourage this kind of behaviour in the populous, of course, and have
huge marketing departments which are entirely devoted to encouraging
irrational thinking: "drink this beer and get girls", "but this car
and get girls", or, now that the industry thinks more girls are getting
drunk and buying cars, we also see "drink this alcopop and flirt with
boys" or "buy this car and he'll propose to you".
Governments get around it using spin/pr teams, but the approach is
essentially the same. One of the Digest articles refers to a new bill
in the US which gives Bush the right to intercept any communications at
all for at least 6 months, what's it called?
The "Protect America" act!
Incredible. It pushes every irrational response going.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
