How did that turn into a smash Bush thread? Oh well, I'll trust in Ron Paul and hopefully not my guns.

Anyway, here is my 2 cents worth. We have basically 3 "closed source" companies to worry about.

One, which is the most popular has both the least amount of quality and ethics. Enter M$.

Two, has some questionable ethics practices such as DRM and so on, but has a reasonably decent product. Enter OS/X. They aren't nearly as popular, but are well known. They come in second. It should be noted that Apple has abandoned its DRM support lately and allows for the use of third party software without deliberate harassment on the part of the company. (mostly)

Three, has an excellent product in both hardware and software, it highly ethical contributing much influential software to open source including a version of its own operating system, and is arguably builds the most advanced servers in the world. Of course, I'm referring to Sun, builders of Solaris, Open Office, Java.... you get the idea. This is traditional big business in the best fashion, which builds a great product and gives back to the community, a very 19th century idea almost akin to chivalry.

http://www.sun.com/download/index.jsp

Few if any people who aren't techs have even heard of Sun. You will NOT find a Solaris box sold at Best Buy anytime soon. Nevertheless, Linux wouldn't be the same without them. Remember, nice guys finish last in the cut throat world of business.

The antidote for all of this nonsense is to support open source. Use Linux or some variant of BSD or even Open Solaris if you don't need encryption or 64 bit support. Find media conversion websites like media-convert.com or zamzar.com (which is clunky + requires your email). Then, be happy. Find extra codecs and if you MUST have wireless, get a WET54G or a Buffalo Air Station. Do find a way to encrypt any file that even pretends to be important, even if it is just your mailing address, so that NO ONE can decrypt it.

Linux doesn't justify itself purely on technical merits. It is mainly justified by a values system which included flexibility, freedom, and cooperation. I'm not saying this to sound like some sort of socialism. I feel that this is the very opposite, almost a libertarian solution to IT issues.

BTW: I'm not fond of Bush either. I support Ron Paul for now or the Constitutional party in general.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ & http://www.constitutionparty.com/

Of course, this is purely my own opinion.

How could any human being say this with a straight face? I'm sorry, I'm gonna have to pull out the B.S. flag on this quote.

The *victim* is at fault? Give me a break and get back to reality. I guess it's the bank's fault for having money when they get robbed, ehh?

Edit - even if the victim is the antagonist as you've stated, that's still no reason for murder. Furthermore, people are not born mentally ill. Some have a disposition, yes, but mental "illness" is a learned behavior (be it environmental or social or whatever).

The best way to be safe is to simply refuse to be a victim or to succumb to a lack of discipline either online or in the real world. The least vulnerable people that I know take responsibility for their well being and of those around them. They are citizens, not merely sheeple or civilians. They have the means for their own self reliance or self defense. Using an open source operating system with security in mind is one way. Owning a guard dog or a self defense device and using it with prudence is another way. Having scads of money and power is of secondary importance only. Having a positive attitude is a must.

There are always going to be black hat hackers, psychopaths, vandals, thieves and virus writers. While victims aren't at fault for crimes directed against them, they are at fault to a certain point of being neglectful of their own welfare in certain cases. A good example in the real world was Reginald Denny riding around outdoors in a riot with unlocked doors and his windows rolled down. Another would be using M$ with no security software. Punishing crooks only is a half baked solution because they get the "first shot" at crime. We then have to come up from behind to free ourselves.... over and over again.

Passing the buck to some bureaucrat to do for us what we should do for ourselves is simply not a solution, but part of the problem. Hopefully, in cyberspace, using open source, acting with altruism to improve it ourselves for the common good and encouraging others to do the same is the true legacy of Linux. Passing the buck to M$, or to some other company especially one who is "ethically" and "quality" challenged is not really productive.

Well said, mdlinuxwolf. I would just like to comment on the last paragraph. I think the solution has to be a two step process. First is the government intervention to catch and punish the criminals. Second, and more important, should be education to teach people how to use a computer responsibly and safely. I would like to see pamphlets handed out when buying a computer. I would also like to see workshop classes that anyone can attend to get hands-on experience. This, of course, would be in an ideal world. But we live in a world where most people are "too busy" to read books and take classes, depend on others to fix everything, and think that if they ignore a problem it'll go away. The ones that do read and learn how to fix their own problems usually discover the "big picture" - that Microsoft and Mac aren't the only choices for an OS.

Another could be playing Russian Roulette with a fully loaded gun.

Agreed, especially with the part I highlighted. And I agree that we can all be proactive against crime (of whatever sort), but that does not mean the victim is *at fault*, be it identity theft, murder, rape, etc... The responsibility for the crime lays solely in the hands of the criminal, and while I agree that we can do things to "harden" ourselves as targets, I'm not willing to accept blame if someone were to murder me or a loved one.

Ignorance != responsibility...that's talking apples and oranges.

I agree (again) that hardening one's self as a target is a good idea. Relying on your "safety net" (Microsoft, the government, etc...) is a bad idea to begin with, but consider this: if the world ran on morals and values that did not accept violence and crime, we wouldn't *have to* harden ourselves as targets. The fact that crime exists is indicative of screwy social values and acceptance of crime as "a fact of life". Again, I wave the B.S. flag...in Boston in the 1800's a woman could walk unescorted through the streets at 3AM without worry. Was it a lack of criminals that allowed for this? No. Was it a big police department and powerful government? Again, no. It was the socially accepted values that the people lived their lives by that allowed for it.

Of course, she also had chaperones and it was legal to carry a gun (usually a derringer) in one's purse or strapped to the inner thigh. Unless one has a CCW, that sort of thing isn't allowed today. :-)



Far be it for crooks to be held responsible, it isn't "politically correct", you see. There is an over-emphasis on tolerance and diversity to the point where the only way to live up to it is for all to be totally dis-enpowered. If the cops say "We didn't see anything", then generally one is SOL.

The problem is two-fold. I'm viewing one half, you're viewing the other. (and given today's reliance on the government, it's unclear whose solution would be "harder" to achieve =) Should we be allowed to defend ourselves? Definitely. Should we *have to*? I think not.

But let's talk reality. I can't carry a gun without a permit, and if I do have a permit and I'm put in a situation where I am required to use deadly force, I can still be in very great danger of losing quite a bit of freedom from the very government that claims to protect me. On the other hand, if a child is raised to believe that crime is an acceptable way of life, then we've set ourselves up for failure in the first place.

A lot of states (38 or 36 ???) have "shall issue" laws where you do a background check, take a course, and you get it if you ask. Of course, in cyber space, there are no restrictions on stealth surfing, encryption and so on. Basically, you can't trash someone else's stuff.

If You hnow mu government, You would kiss Your in the ass

'nough said - back to Win vs *NIX?

I know the whole Vista thing has been beaten to death, but I'd like to share a tiny little story with you guys concerning Microsoft's "latest and greatest"

My wife's computer has run Windows XP for quite some time (without any major problems), but recently it started locking up at random. I determined after a bit of poking around that it was a hardware issue, and since I didn't feel like pulling the entire machine apart to replace the motherboard, I purchased a new Dell for her. And wouldn't you know it...Vista came preinstalled =)

After a few days of getting used to Vista, my wife asked me to get around to building a computer for my daughter using the parts from her old amd64 and other machines I had laying around. I did so, and when time came to install the OS, I asked my wife her opinion...XP or 2000 Professional? (We only have my wife's key for XP).

After a short discussion, we decided to install XP since my wife was so fond of Vista. I got XP installed and activated on my daughter's computer, and just as I was finishing up my wife's shiny new Vista machine puked up a BSOD.

I don't really believe in fate, destiny, kharma, or whatever...but that was almost too ironic to be real...signs of "good things" to come, I guess...

Call me an obstinate bastard, but no child of mine is going to even see a Microsoft OS until they hit school age... and even then it'll only be if it's on the computers at their school.

I want my kids to see Windows from a Linux viewpoint.

Maybe M$'s WGA crap detected that the owner of a Vista installation had just activated XP on a new computer, using a product key that had already been used on another computer, so now it's going to irritate the Vista user with BSODs.

Just kidding! Or am I? ... Being Microsoft you really can't be sure.

I like that. Vista, Steve Ballmer and the various FUD attempts would make some great bedtime stories!

why didn't you just install linux on the computer for your daughter, would have made sense to me

(Chuckle...) If any company actually could "dominate the computer industry," I assure you that it would have already done so ... and its CEO would have retired to a tropical island where naked people of the opposite gender would while away their time feeding the aforesaid former-CEO peeled grapes and strong alcoholic beverages.

Alas... the computer industry is most certainly the least susceptible to "domination" of any industry ever known to man. Strange as it may seem (to you, now, but not to me...) everything that you take for granted now or that you fear now will seem "quaint" to you in just a few years' time. That most-specifically includes "Microsoft Windows, and any silly notions that such a simple system could ever once have been thought of as 'dominant' of anything at all."

Once upon a time, there was a company called Wang. They produced dedicated word-processing computers, except that those machines were not called "computers" because they could not do anything else but word-processing. They had great daisy-wheel printers, though, and more than 85% of the law-offices in the world owned at least one. When IBM produced a truly-pathetic machine called the "PC" ... why, it was no match for IBM's venerable DisplayWriter, which at least could have been called a 'competitor' to Wang's indisputable monopoly position ... Wang laughed.

"pwWANGggg!!!" Heh, heh, heh...

Obviously, the general-purpose "PC" went on to completely obliterate Wang and every trace of it's "indisputable monopoly position." Ironically enough, it then went on to obliterate IBM's own position too -- or at least, to completely redefine it.

So... let's stop quibbling about "Microsoft's dominant position" and take a good hard look at, say, the iPhone. This is a general purpose computer that fits comfortably in the palm of your hand and that looks unbelievably sexy while doing it. {"Me want." "Me Want!"} Well, guess what... Microsoft can't go there. And open-source is already there.

If you're "worried about" Microsoft's "dominant position," it simply means that you are (ahem... sorry...) clueless about the fact that the game has completely and fundamentally changed. The "position" that Microsoft may have dreamed of "dominating" no longer exists.

And as for you, and your career, guess what ... if you don't know "Windows and OS/X and Linux," and how to work interchangeably with all three ... you are 100Z3R!

And Microsoft ... consisting of savvy and resourceful people ... understands this as well as anyone and is not out there sipping sherry and eating bon-bons like Wang did. The sheer beauty of this business is that it is changing so fast that, if you happen to "fall off the bus," you can simply wait a little bit and hop right back on again.

Cheers! The US judges is clearly the most corrupted including abuse of his power in among the democratic nations.

Well I think I need to clarify something about all the above posts. Although when something is wrong, it is a wrong. Terrorism is wrong by killing civilians, but did the Western Nations (Allies) who are condemning terrorism is 100% right? Obviously NO. Israel- Sealed the border of Gaza Strip recently. What's this? While terrorism organizations like JI etc had never did anything such mass terror attack apart of 911, but I think that the number of people who were affected and the period of time affected by these terror disaster is not as long as Israel occupation of Palestine with the use of torture, allowing the Arabs there to be starved etc. What's the difference between the US and Hitler? Both were crazy! The only difference is US is just being supportive, never did anything "real" while Hitler is a man of words. What he said to his people,the Germans is always become a fact.

So far, International Community does not really condemn Israel for t\such immoral act.

Hopefully North Korea and Iran developed Nuclear Weapons and Missiles that can hit New York and Washington as soon as possible. To end the suffering of people across the world.

Furthermore, a judge in any nation does not say Oh-you had murder someone. So death penalty (Or Life Imprisonment, depending on the nation/territory.) must be yours. Similarly, when someone manslaughter someone, it is not always life imprisonment. some of them could have just jailed for 6 years, while others need 15 years or so.

So the fact is while extreme ideas are likely to be wrong, it need not be 100% nonsense and lies. Try to understand the other party and Middle East crisis,Serbia-Kosovo crisis would have been solved.