devcpp

Agreed, this is exactly why I said "predictable". The dilution of techies among the more casual crowd on the Internet was supposed to happen (or we'd be out of jobs), but I wish they had been taught some important concepts of software before learning how to use a browser.

I tried the same curve and got open source and free software. This is rather depressing but it's predictable.

...which would be detrimental to Microsoft. Limiting our options to theirs is precisely their goal by giving us a great IDE that only works on Windows.

They're never gonna go it. They stand to win nothing from that.

I don't care how beautiful they look. As a user, I just don't like them. For example, Mega or Blogspot's animations are very nice, but I just get annoyed when I see them. And I don't think I'm alone.

Oh come on, you know what he meant. The members of HN are passionate about startups, technology, money, somewhat politics. Gay marriage and other social issues spark little interest. It's understandable.

If Windows was FOSS and we could "swap ROMs" and extract their stuff easily as many of us do on Android, it would be much more acceptable. Forcing your users to use your other products when you have a monopoly is absolutely outrageous.

As it is, I'm staying on Windows 7 (I have only one laptop and need Word, otherwise I'd be using Linux instead of a Linux VM) and Paranaoid Android. No unwanted Micrsoft or Google products anywhere.

Yeah, it's completely wrong. Statistically, it is very unprobable that I have seen so many articles about books without searching for them and no one complaining about literature in the past few months on the Internet. This claim is ridiculous.

You could say the same about a lot of crimes. Prostitutes, hitmen, scammers, drug dealers, a lot of professions are inherently hurtful for the society. Heck, you could say the same about banking, insurances, real estate, utilities: a lot of people would be out of a job if theit companies were honest. Entire industries rely on some degree of scamming. And yet we still complain about dishonest banks, lack of competition, etc.

Stallman's views are pragmatic: some people would lose their job but that's the price to pay to get closer to an ideal society. That's not more extremist than socialism.

No.

The even greater success of GPL as a license is that it not only makes sense to contribue back, but you have to. This is much more efficient for good contributions flowing from everywhere. The fact that good non-GPL alternatives like BSD exist kind of destroys it though.

1. I don't see how it would be hypocritical.

2. It should steal credit form the recipient. The money is what makes charities work, more than the work in itself.

3. What's so great about selfless giving? If donations can increase by publishing the donor's name, so be it! Is there even a single downside to selfish giving? Money is money, no matter the intent.

So you don't care about backdoors, malware, who knows whatever else they may put in that code?

Two wrongs don't make a right. He can criticize the US all he wants. We all can. And we all can criticize whichever leaders we want for being assholes. It may be unfair but Snowden had no choice given the reaction of the US.

Don't look at it as separate points. You have to understand the situation as a whole and that if you prized the US and had been in his situation and didn't want to rot in jail forever, you'd have done the exact same.

EDIT: Or, you know what? Perhaps you're smarter than me. What would you have done different? It's easy to criticize but you'll have to come up with solutions. For the US, they could've just obeyed their own law and requested warrants wherever there was probable cause. But for Snowden? What could he have done different while preserving his own life?

I don't think looking bad matters to these people at this point.

And that's only the more optimistic scenario.

Seriously? So you're okay with the NSA spying -legally or not- on everyone, when the highest ranking people have denied this for years? Do you really think spying on Google, Yahoo!, and Microsoft users as a whole constitute probable cause for a search?

I don't care about the consequences. If the US had apologized for this terrible mess and all the lies to its own people, Snowden wouldn't have had to do any of what had followed. Instead, it still refuses to corroborate his claims, making it seems likely that there's something incriminating here.

If this doesn't seem fishy on the US side, and if you think anyone wouldn't have thought about blowing the whistle on all these lies by our leaders, you're seriously delusional. Or a troll.

That's not a fair comparison when Maastricht lets you go freely anywhere in Europe.

I see non-Swartz posts. There were 2 non-NSA posts the day it blew up. I actually told myself "Ah, HN is obsessing with something today, looks like it's privacy this time".

You give them one more user, which is worth a lot when a software company negociates its value before a buyout.

I don't know about the others, but the reason I didn't comment was precisely because I didn't want to log in using Facebook. Your giant trees were blocking my view of the forest.

Giving the choice between a third-party and a classic profile is the best way to go. It complicates things a bit but no one has a reason not to try your service out.

That's short-term thinking. If students don't use your products, they won't when they turn into tomorrow's professionals. Lots of successful companies have been doing this for many years. $60+ per month is way too expensive. Thankfully for them, piracy is widespread enough to ensure that GIMP's ugly interface keeps students from switching to it.

Open Source? Who cares about open source? What we're talking about is free software. The bulk of the code they write is all-rights-reserved.

This is not comparable at all. Nuclear arsenals cannot be dismantled because of the benefits of MAD and the other guy might be considered in a position of force.

In our case, PRISM can be dismantled without the other guy (i.e the population) retaliating in any way or any enemy country gaining any advantage out of that.

Is it not considered evidence acquired illegally and unusable in court? Considering most people think that most of this information does not qualify as probable cause per the Fourth Amendment...

We could increase the productivity of humanity in fabulous ways if we all knew how to use computers efficiently. Instead, we go the other way and only use them as entertainment platforms. Too bad education doesn't make big money.

Sorry, I supposed that gadders quoted you accurately due to the quotes around "Israel has apartheid". I apologize.

I'll edit my reply to maintain the legitimacy of the question.

He's the president of the main right-wing party. People like that often remain head of their state for very long once they're elected (first they're sworn in and then get more mandates to "finish their job"). Examples from my home country: Francois Mitterrand, Jacques Chirac. It may have something to do with this but you can get a way easier explanation.

Agreed. And it goes like that with politics. No party even debates about economy, privacy and so on. That doesn't bring in votes. Security does. The entire concept of right/left wing in Israel is based on how nationalist a party is.

Right. Israel has "kept expanding". Ignore the strategic positions that allowed them to survive (the Golan), ignore the repeated aggressions from the Sinai which made Israel have to take it and give it back several times.

Besides, are you saying that wanting someone out of some place but justifies violence? If so, expect me to come at your house and get you out of there with a rifle and don't complain when I do so.

I'll answer for him.

Neither, I read about the apartheid from reliable sources and I know the situation but also read about statistics to make sure I'm not being unfair to either side.

But what about the people who say "Israel has apartheid"? Did you ask how they can claim that? Or do you just assume that they are/have met South Africans who lived under the Apartheid?