ryoder 1,590 #51 July 25, 2009 Quote I'm going to assume you're referring Mac OSX, an OS that was created by a for-profit entity. Wrong. I have been using FreeBSD since 1993. Mac OS X did not exist until 2002."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #52 July 25, 2009 Quote BS. Of informed consumers, i.e. those consumers who no what options are available and know the differences between the various options, MS has nowhere close to a 99% market share. The only BS is your statement about being "informed". You were comparing for-profit software to non-profit software. So, Let's see. 91.2% Windows + 5.0% Mac OS --------------------- 96.2% So, yeah, I was pretty close. I'd consider myself an informed consumer, and I chose Windows over all the others. Why? Because it works best for me. I can probably install and run anything that's out there, and I've used Windows, Linux (Ubuntu, Debian, Mandrake, Suse, Mint, CentOS, RH), PC-BSD, AIX, i5OS, Windows Server 2k, 2k3, 2k8, Novell, Solaris, and a few others which I'm probably leaving out. I'm not disputing that Linux is a stable OS - I'm sure Windows would be more stable if nothing ran on it too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #53 July 25, 2009 Quote Quote I'm going to assume you're referring Mac OSX, an OS that was created by a for-profit entity. Wrong. I have been using FreeBSD since 1993. Mac OS X did not exist until 2002. He said derivative. I know BSD has been around alot longer than that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #54 July 25, 2009 Quote I'm not disputing that Linux is a stable OS - I'm sure Windows would be more stable if nothing ran on it too. "Nothing" runs on it? So the roughly 10,000 applications available for *BSD & Linux don't run? And Apache, (the most used web server in Netcraft's webserver rankings), doesn't run? http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #55 July 25, 2009 Quote Quote I'm not disputing that Linux is a stable OS - I'm sure Windows would be more stable if nothing ran on it too. "Nothing" runs on it? So the roughly 10,000 applications available for *BSD & Linux don't run? And Apache, (the most used web server in Netcraft's webserver rankings), doesn't run? http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html Dude, ease up, I left off the smiley at the end of the sentence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #56 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuote BS. Of informed consumers, i.e. those consumers who no what options are available and know the differences between the various options, MS has nowhere close to a 99% market share. The only BS is your statement about being "informed". Wrong. It is only informed consumers who are able to make an informed choice, regardless of the product. W/r/t computers, informed consumers are a pretty small subset of users. (Your numbers seem to be pretty outdated, btw.) QuoteI'd consider myself an informed consumer, and I chose Windows over all the others. Why? Because it works best for me. Most informed consumers I know choose other options, except the gamers. Of the people I consider knowledgeable enough to classify as computer geeks, none use Windows on their primary personal machines. They use OS X, Linux, *BSD, or Solaris/OpenSolaris. The ones that use OS X tend to do so because it's a *nix distribution with a "captain." (When there are disagreements among developers for many Linux distributions, sometimes some of the developers will branch off and form their own distribution. This ultimately results in many similar Linux distributions that lack a core set of packages that is guaranteed to be in every distribution. Large FOSS projects often lack a "captain" that can make command decisions and keep the team working together.) Of informed consumers, i.e. those with enough knowledge to make informed decisions about their software, for profit software doesn't have anywhere close to 99% user share. That market share is only achieved because most consumers that think the only two options are Windows or Mac OS X, and don't even realize that they could choose a free alternative. QuoteI'm not disputing that Linux is a stable OS - I'm sure Windows would be more stable if nothing ran on it too. That's a pretty laughable statement, considering the immense amount of software available for Linux and the fact that Linux runs on a far greater number of architectures than Windows.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #57 July 25, 2009 Man, all this computer talk is awes--zzzZZZzzzzzzz...Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #58 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuotePersonally, I prefer the "Let me keep my damned money and don't go spending it for the concentrated benefit of anyone." Fortunately, here in the USA, our Constitution empowers Congress to pass legislation to prevent such selfish philosophies from prevailing. Yes, in favor of the even more selfish philosphies of those who think that other people's things belong to them. The selfish store owner who selfishly removes tagging, failing to understand that the property belongs to the benevolent tagger. Yes, it is selfish to want to keep what I earned. It is selfish for others to want to take what I have earned because they think it's right. It's a good thing we had good and selfless people spending trillions of our money in Iraq. People like you and me just don't know what's good for us. I'm sorry, jcd, for actually thinking and having my own feelings on things. I'll just be the good Boxer, just keep working for others. Who will you be? Snowball? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #59 July 25, 2009 Most informed people about the law that I know tend to do things a bit differently from the rest of the population. Most informed machinists I know use CNC systems to fabricate parts within great tolerances. Um - I merely need what works. I've got a pc and a mac. My kids have a mac. I've thought about getting firefox on the Mac because Safari seems to have issues sometimes, but they are not enough to tip the balance. I get what works. I get what everybody knows. I understand why many prefer Linux, etc. Good on them. I'm just glad there's a choice out there where I can get a Mac (fantastic for multimedia) or a pc (great for business utilities) or linux (generally good for things). Now, let's say the government decided that it would now have its own software, for which we would all be taxed and it would be free for all. You'd say, "but I like linux. I'll spend more on the new system and get less than I had before." Then some high-minded do-gooder would accuse you of being selfish. Just because you are happy with it doesn't mean it's the best for everyone. And the government would provide all necessary tech support. The full version of GovX will out on Jan. 1. Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? Change "health insurance" with "operating system" and you've got it. Benefit in many's eyes - it'll kill microsoft. In fact, that would likely be the dominant reason for doing such a thing. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_squared431 0 #60 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI do think that healthcare is a right. Where do you think your right to free health care, paid for by someone else, comes from? Some would point to the DOI: Quote We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. [B]If someone does not have enough money to treat a terminal illness and dies because of it, what happened to their right to life as described above? Granted, it's not the Constitution but it is a pretty strong indication that the founding fathers did consider it a right. Have you ever heard of medicare/medicaid/and short term disability? If people pay attention to how certain programs worked they can qualify for them. Yes, it is paperwork, maybe stressful, and can take a few weeks but a person in a situation of needing medical care to survive they do get covered. Some 100 percent others almost 80 percent. I think that is pretty damn good, don't you? For the record, if someone has been working and has medical insurance they need to buy into an additional plan for situations like this. They are out there and may only cost 20 bucks additional out of your cks (before taxes). These plans cover cancer, accident inury, and long term. I have this and if I can afford it then I know someone else can. I am a single parent and have no help to pay my bills or raise my child. That child is my half brother who I adopted in 07'. He is 8 now and I have had him for over 4 yrs. I will not spend my money I work hard for so some dead beat drug addict can have medical care! People are treated equal if they contribute to their own well being. People who have made the choice to not work and expect others to provide for them can fend for themselves. I am sure you are using that phrase above to make you meaningless point here. ([B]"All men created equal") everyone is given the same opportunities to get an education, to vote, and it is their choice to persue it. Their choice to work or not work, their choice to have medical insurance, their choice to live life the way they have!! [B]"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" everyone has a choice to have this and they are who put themselves in the situation they are in. I made the choice to have a roof over my head, a car to drive, food to eat, medical insurance, to be a parent to a child who needed someone to put him first and with these, I have to work and make money to have these things. I am not on welfare and do not expect anyone to pay for me. So why should I pay for someone else? They made the choice to be where they are today. You don't need a flat screen tv, or a porscha in the driveway, any tv is fine and you can drive a pinto. Don't spend 10 dollars on cigarettes (300 a month), have starbucks everyday at about 5 bucks a day(150 a month), or buy a 12pk of beer instead of paying for their OWN medical insurance. It is that simple and don't retort and say there are no jobs out there. There are, it is just people will not take a job they feel is beneth them.TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1 I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #61 July 25, 2009 Quote If someone does not have enough money to treat a terminal illness and dies because of it, what happened to their right to life as described above? What if someone doesn't have enough food, and dies of hunger? Or is homeless, and dies of exposure? The fact that the founding fathers established government programs to feed, clothe and shelter everyone in the nation clearly shows that they meant us to establish a national healthcare system. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #62 July 25, 2009 Gee, Deedy. Some may call you selfish. Let me guess - some may accuse you of thinking you are better than others. Others simply cannot afford to do what you obviously have enough money to do. Hmmm. Like me, you probably don't skydive too often anymore, eh? Or go out to movies. Gotta live frugally to take care of yourself and your own. How selfish you and I are... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_squared431 0 #63 July 25, 2009 Quote Quote If someone does not have enough money to treat a terminal illness and dies because of it, what happened to their right to life as described above? What if someone doesn't have enough food, and dies of hunger? Or is homeless, and dies of exposure? The fact that the founding fathers established government programs to feed, clothe and shelter everyone in the nation clearly shows that they meant us to establish a national healthcare system. It does not mean that! These programs were not set up for long term, these programs were set up to help someone get back on their feet. There are 3rd and some 4th generations on welfare. By letting this continue and by supplying medical care to those who feel everyone else should pay for them is wrong. The government if they go thru with this health reform is telling Americans it is okay to be lazy. It is okay for you to have everything your neighbor does even though that neighbor worked their ass off went to school to get where he/she is and all you did was sit on your ass and pop out kids you can't feed and clothe. Is that what you are saying? Are you willing to pay out of your pocket for this? Then, what if the government now says in order to do this each person making 100-250,000 a year have to has to pay an addition $5000 and anyone 75-99,000 has to pay 2,500 extra in taxes a year, and then everyone else no longer gets a refund? Are you still going to say everyone needs to have free health care? Take a look at the whole picture. People who get refunds are those who basically don't make enough during the year in the first place. Right now Obama wants people in a certain income to pay for everything. It won't stop there though. It will trickle down the food chain. It will effect everyone and everything. What is the point in telling our children to get an education if the government is saying its okay if you don't cause we will pay for you to survive?TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1 I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_squared431 0 #64 July 25, 2009 QuoteGee, Deedy. Some may call you selfish. Let me guess - some may accuse you of thinking you are better than others. Others simply cannot afford to do what you obviously have enough money to do. Hmmm. Like me, you probably don't skydive too often anymore, eh? Or go out to movies. Gotta live frugally to take care of yourself and your own. How selfish you and I are... Exactly! I save money to be able to do the things I like and love to do. I may not do them every day or weekend but I appreciate them more when I do do them. I live within my means so I can survive with my income. Hell, I pay 11.58 for cable instead of 50-100 a moth to have 100 plus stations. Why do you need so many f'ng stations? You don't! That is why I can afford to make it month to month and year to year. I cut my monthly cost, I don't eat out, I don't smoke, or drink a 12pk of beer every few days. I would love to just spend money to go and skydive, play in the tunnel, and drink beer all weekend but as a parent I can not do that. I am teaching a child values by him seeing how hard I work and what I give up to do that. Friends have offered to buy me jumps and tunnel time but you know what, if I can not pay for myself then I do not need to do the activity. More people need to get back to the basics of life and then more people would not need the government to pay for them.TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1 I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #65 July 25, 2009 QuoteYes, in favor of the even more selfish philosphies of those who think that other people's things belong to them. No, in favor of the less selfish philosophy that those who benefit most from a civil, governed society should pay back to society for that benefit. QuoteThe selfish store owner who selfishly removes tagging, failing to understand that the property belongs to the benevolent tagger. I'll admit that I never really understood that whole "Do not remove under penalty of law" concept with mattress tags. I fail to see how it's relevant to the topic at hand. QuoteYes, it is selfish to want to keep what I earned. It is selfish for others to want to take what I have earned because they think it's right. If you want to live in and profit from the USA, you have a responsibility to pay your dues. QuoteIt's a good thing we had good and selfless people spending trillions of our money in Iraq. People like you and me just don't know what's good for us. I'm not about to claim that I support the war in Iraq (or Afghanistan). However, it would be naïve to believe that there are not people in government who have a much better idea about what is good for society than you or I do. QuoteI'm sorry, jcd, for actually thinking and having my own feelings on things. I know you're capable of it, but I'm not seeing examples of independent thought in your post. It reads more like parroting of Libertarian rhetoric.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #66 July 25, 2009 QuoteMost informed machinists I know use CNC systems to fabricate parts within great tolerances. Seems like a waste of CNC if the allowable tolerances are great (large). QuoteI'm just glad there's a choice out there where I can get a Mac (fantastic for multimedia) or a pc (great for business utilities) or linux (generally good for things). My point was that most computer users are not aware that they have the option of Linux (or *BSD, *Solaris, etc.). Those people should not be considered when making claims regarding consumers' choice of for profit software versus free open source software, because they don't realize that they even have the option to install a free, open source, user friendly operating system. QuoteNow, let's say the government decided that it would now have its own software, for which we would all be taxed and it would be free for all. You'd say, "but I like linux. I'll spend more on the new system and get less than I had before." I'd be much more likely to say, "I like Mac OS X, but I'll try it on on a virtual box for awhile." QuoteThe full version of GovX will out on Jan. 1. … Benefit in many's eyes - it'll kill microsoft. In fact, that would likely be the dominant reason for doing such a thing. Actually, I would support rewards based government subsidized open source software development for security reasons. I would love to see a security audited OS like OpenBSD designed for the masses. Microsoft's achilles heel has traditionally been their security through obscurity philosophy (i.e. the belief that withholding access to source code from users and the public makes it less likely that any bugs in the code can be exploited). If the government were to sponsor development of an OS, the primary reason would be security, not to put MS under. Personally, I believe cyber-security to be something that should be of great concern to the federal government (as should the health of the national population).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kbordson 8 #67 July 25, 2009 QuoteI know you're capable of it, but I'm not seeing examples of independent thought in your post. It reads more like parroting of Libertarian rhetoric. If it's truly his beliefs, why dismiss them as just rhetoric? How hard is it to accept that not everyone wants to sacrifice everything for the good of a government that isn't necessarily good for them? Stop for a moment. Stand in the shoes of that Father... or in DD's case, that Mother. See the world from their eyes - they want the best for their children. They have SERIOUSLY worked hard and sacrificed to give their children benefit.... who do you think you are to take from them and their children? Why do you think the government should steal from them to give to children of others that don't chose to take care of their own children? Is charity a good thing? ABSOLUTELY. Should it be government mandated? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #68 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteIf someone does not have enough money to treat a terminal illness and dies because of it, what happened to their right to life as described above? What if someone doesn't have enough food, and dies of hunger? Or is homeless, and dies of exposure? It's not equivalent. There are low-cost options to food and housing but if someone needs a bone marrow transplant to live and there are no genetically identical donors, it could cost up to $200,000 (source). Is it right that someone should die simply because he can't (or his insurance company won't) pay? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #69 July 25, 2009 QuoteHow hard is it to accept that not everyone wants to sacrifice everything for the good of a government society that isn't necessarily good for them gave them the opportunity to make everything they've made? It's easy to accept that some people really are that selfish.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #70 July 25, 2009 QuotePersonally, I prefer the "Let me keep my damned money and don't go spending it for the concentrated benefit of anyone." You're not alone. I've noticed that there are several people on these boards that are under the illusion that if the government gave out no money, then there would be no taxes. The US government, for all it's flaws, is still a capitalist entity. Even if they spent ZERO dollars on ANYONE (including citizens), they would still tax us at the same rate (or more). Just like a retail salesman charges the highest price they can, the US government raises taxes until people scream loud enough. It's ain't about what they're spending, it's about them taking as much as they can get away with.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #71 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteHow hard is it to accept that not everyone wants to sacrifice everything for the good of a government society that isn't necessarily good for them gave them the opportunity to make everything they've made? It's easy to accept that some people really are that selfish. I owe "society" exactly two things: Jack and Shit. Unless you're a community organizer, "society" doesn't give you a job. Since the company pays me for the work that I do for them, I don't "owe" them a thing.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #72 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteHow hard is it to accept that not everyone wants to sacrifice everything for the good of a government society that isn't necessarily good for them gave them the opportunity to make everything they've made? It's easy to accept that some people really are that selfish. I owe "society" exactly two things: Jack and Shit. Unless you're a community organizer, "society" doesn't give you a job. Since the company pays me for the work that I do for them, I don't "owe" them a thing. 10/10 irony scoreMath tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #73 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow hard is it to accept that not everyone wants to sacrifice everything for the good of a government society that isn't necessarily good for them gave them the opportunity to make everything they've made? It's easy to accept that some people really are that selfish. I owe "society" exactly two things: Jack and Shit. Unless you're a community organizer, "society" doesn't give you a job. Since the company pays me for the work that I do for them, I don't "owe" them a thing. 10/10 irony score 10/10 idiocy score. Show me how Joe Welfare sitting on his couch provided a damn thing to me and I'll admit you may have a point.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #74 July 25, 2009 QuoteShow me how Joe Welfare sitting on his couch provided a damn thing to me and I'll admit you may have a point. Besides a job (i.e. opportunity for employment)? Don't you work for the government, either directly or via a contracted company? I'm reminded of Joseph Heller's description of Major Major Major Major's father in Catch-22: Major Major's father was a sober God-fearing man whose idea of a good joke was to lie about his age. He was a long-limbed farmer, a God-fearing, freedom-loving, law-abiding rugged individualist who held that federal aid to anyone but farmers was creeping socialism. He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. … He was a proud and independent man who was opposed to unemployment insurance and never hesitated to whine, whimper, wheedle, and extort for as much as he could get from whomever he could. … "The Lord gave us good farmers two strong hands so that we could take as much as we could grab with both of them," he preached with ardor on the courthouse steps or in front of the A & P as he waited for the bad-tempered gum-chewing young cashier he was after to step outside and give him a nasty look. "If the Lord didn't want us to take as much as we could get," he preached, "He wouldn't have given us two good hands to take it with." And the others murmured, "Amen." Major Major's father had a Calvinist's faith in predestination and could perceive distinctly how everyone's misfortunes but his own were expressions of God's will. … I'd not be surprised if you fail to see the relevance.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_squared431 0 #75 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteHow hard is it to accept that not everyone wants to sacrifice everything for the good of a government society that isn't necessarily good for them gave them the opportunity to make everything they've made? It's easy to accept that some people really are that selfish. Let me ask you a few questions and I hope you will reply with an answer. What is it that you do for a living, do you have a family to support, and do you pay your taxes? If you don't do any of the above or maybe only 1 of those applies to you then that answers to why you are in the mind set that you are in. Think of it this way as well, if this health reform takes place are you will to give up your jumping and or other activities you do? The amount we will all have to pay is going to hit us all hard in the pocket book. If you are a home owner, it might cost you more in property tax and that increase can cause you to lose your home. Have you thought about that? Would you give up your home so mr and mrs sponge can have medical insurance for themselves and their 5 kids?TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1 I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
