Windows 95 reminds me of an old Eagles song:

Life in the Crash lane
Surely make you lose your mind
Life in the crash lane, everything all the time
Life in the crash lane, uh huh
Blowin' and burnin', blinded by thirst
They didn't see the stop sign,
took a turn for the worse

Windows 95 was a house of cards that wasted thousands of hours of millions of people who lost their work and had to have their computers "repaired" on an ongoing basis. Not fond memories, I tell you.

I switched to Linux in 97, and although there were many other issues, once you got it running, it stayed that way.

Oh, no, we're already trespassing on the abyss's property.

and you didn't make them any less nervous. )

Actually, there *is* such a thing as unlimited Internet. You have a certain bandwidth limit, and you are allowed to suck down data all day long at that rate. Trouble is that's not an efficient use of their network, nor your time. People usually want high speed when they want it, and are willing to put up with total download amounts rather than being speed limited.

So, 5GB == 40Gbits/month = 1.3Gbits/day = 55Mbits/hour = 15Kbps **unlimited** (like, really, completely unlimited, download at 15kbps all day long).

The article you link to is three year old, or should I say three years wrong. Talk to any Verizon reseller or rep, and they'll tell you "no such thing as unlimited, everything has a 5GB cap, and beyond that we charge you $.01KB."

One of these days, some victim of a botnet is going to initiate a class action lawsuit against Microsoft for publishing an insecure operating system, with the injured parties being the people whose machines were induced to participate in a tort.

It's horrible that we're not recognized for our tremendous accomplishments. Anyone who is skeptical of our claims is just completely ignorant of the history of the organization.

Errr, how many times do I need to post this to meet your definition of "frequently"? I wouldn't want you to be wrong in the Internet.

Perhaps this is why OSI is useless and FSF useful despite the oddities of RMS, it's the same "software you can look at but not touch" all over again.

Sorry, stinking load of crap. Even when somebody takes some BSD-licensed code and does nifty magic with it under a proprietary license, the BSD-licensed code they started from remains available to you. So, no "software you can look at but not touch". If someone takes some reciprocal licensed code, and does nifty magic with it, they have to release it with the full rights they had. So, no "software you can look at but not touch".

It's the enemies of freedom, the enemies of openness, that claim that open source code is "code under glass". If it's open source, you can get the source, period. If it's open source, you can modify it, period. If it's open source, you can share it, period. There might be constraints on sharing, like the GPL's requirement that you share source whenever you share binaries, or the QPL's requirement that you distribute modifications as pristine source plus patches.

Please send me the email addresses that contacted OSI "repeatedly ... over the years". I will check our email logs and report back here. If you don't step up with you facts, then I will accuse you of dealing it out with a large shovel. Fair enough?

I'm sorry, drinky, but your poo is still stinky. Open Source, per the Open Source Definition, requires redistribution rights. But I admire your creativity with the facts. Say, are you still a member of the Flat Earth Society?

Uhhhhh, dude, I'm still working for a living. I don't know where you bought your facts, but you should ask for your money back. Money back!

You're missing the point. When somebody says "I won't sue you for doing this", the law does not allow them to retract that. Worry about more likely things happening, like getting hit by lightning, or having civilization come to an end because of a meteorite strike, or global warming actually having any bad effects.

This is insane, of course. If I link to your website, I'm just telling people where to find it. To say that one cannot link to your address would be to say that you're allowed to restrict people's speech. It would be like having a secret street address which cannot be said out loud. Absurd! Batshit insane!

Lovelock is too stupid to survive. If you suspend democracy, how do you know that the people who are then running things will 1) agree that climate change is real, 2) agree that man is causing climate change, 3) agree that man should take action to stop the climate from changing, 4) agree to do something, 5) agree to do something that might work, or 6) agree to do something that actually WILL work (and just what that might be, I don't see anybody seriously proposing, other than to kill most people and go back to being hunter-gatherers).

So in exchange for all that uncertainty, Lovelock wants to give up democracy? Just kill the moron now before he says something even MORE stupid.

The price of computers has been deflating pretty uniformly for the last 30 years. By your theory, consumers will stop spending when their money is deflating because anything they could buy would cost less later. Again, in your system of economics (Hi, JMK!), it's stupid to have bought a computer at any time, because you could get a better computer just by waiting. And yet, here you are on Slashdot, disproving your own theory at about 3 billion cycles per second.

In the long run, Keynes' theory is dead.