L. Neil Smith's
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 125, June 11, 2001
Ride the Lightning
From: "campbell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mr Totty wrote in part:
Who the hell is anybody to think that they have the right to lay claim to another's blood, sweat, and tears?
Sir, My first question to you is: Have you bothered to read the GNU open source licensing agreement? Open sourcing is voluntarily; however, open sourcing also protects the contributors property by guaranteeing that no one else can 'profit' from other's intellectual efforts.
Lambasting 'others' generally isn't a part of open source, GNU or
Linux; however, lambasting Microsoft is absolutely fair game.
1) Microsoft DID NOT write MS DOS, they 'bought' a copy of the source code from another programmer, changed a few lines and sold it to IBM as PC DOS.
2) Microsoft DID NOT develop the 'windows' interface, they 'borrowed' the idea from Apple who 'borrowed' the idea from Xerox.
3) Microsoft DID STEAL Stacker compression technology, and fought in court long enough to bankrupt Stacker Corp. before admitting to their crime.
Finally, Microsoft apparently borrowed the copy protection scheme for Windows XP and Office XP from the Byzantium Empire, and I predict it will be the Achilles' heel to their success. Home users may be willing to endure Mr. Bill's paironoia, but to businesses, wasted time is wasted money, and Windows XP wastes both in great measure.
Open Sourcing, especally the GNU model (which started out as a chess program), allows for free contribution to existing source codes, and protection of intellectual property on derivative works if the owner so wishes. The fly in the ointment for derivative works is that they do not have the overwhelming support open sourcing provides software such as Linux itself, and they are not guaranteed to work with future versions of the open source software. Many companies realize that the profit is in technical support, not in the generation of code. It is a viable LIBERTARIAN model, and it is being harmed by the lies and misinformation generated by Microsoft, thus, making them public enemy NO 1.
Donald W Campbell
From: "Curtis" <email@example.com>
I've been thinking.
I think that the government should only get one chance at convicting somebody, the last thing the state needs is appeals.
Actually, I misphrased that a little, if the plantiff is the government, they don't deserve appeals. The almost unlimited funds they get to persue the case offsets the appeals nicely.
Defendant against the government however, get to appeal it all the way to the top, because they lack this funding. And if ultimately found innocent, the government should be paying to the legal expenses incurred by the defense.
From: "Ken L. Holder" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
"The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis: a little known aspect of public health in Germany, 1933-45" by Robert N Proctor
Deja Vue all over again!
From: "Daniel Weiner" <email@example.com>
As always, I enjoyed reading L. Neil's article about so called "smart" guns. Though mormally he is the epitomy of clarity in his writing, one could get the impression that The Weapons Shop guns used special rings to operate them. As a long time fan of that story, I would like to remind one and all that the Weapon Shop guns were keyed to the owners brainwaves and could also read your intent. If you were defending yourself, the gun worked; if you were the agressor, it would not. Though the gun itself is fantasy, the Weapon Shop motto is most certainly not.
As a long time experienced copier technician and a computer-geek-in-training, I am all too familiar with the developmental problems associated with microproceesor based equipment. For all that computers and digital technology in general is capable of doing, reliability is most certainly not one of its achievements. The new digital copiers, as cool as they are in what they do, are far less reliable than the older analog machines. And nobody in either industry seems capable of introducing a new model without building in a host of bugs that take at least a year to fix, and some bugs never go away.
Considering what weapons are for, computerizing them would be a disaster. Make mine an analog gun!
From: "Curtis" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I was pulled over and issued a citation for, get this, having a Chevrolet emblem in glowing blue LEDs in my grille. The citation was for violation Florida laws concerning impersonating an officer! I will grant that my car WAS a police car in a former life, but I've never, ever, seen a police car with a glowing chevy logo of any color.
What makes this even more fun is prior to installing the thing, I asked the DMV if it would be legal. They told me that as long as it wasn't blinking, it was OK. It feels like entrapment!
Curt Handsaker. email@example.com