Re: OT Strange Punishment
The kid's an idiot. Set up qemu on the mandatory windows machine and run your Ubuntu. The sentence said nothing about running an emulated OS on your monitored OS. The kid is just a whiner First they give me two felonies, then they throw me in prison, and now this. As if using Windows is more damaging to your reputation than felonies... On 8/29/07, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 08:32:25PM -0300, Rafael Almeida wrote: The main problem I see here is the government incentivating the purshase of Microsoft product. It's kinda dumb paying the guy pay to a company that has nothing to do witht he whole thing as a punishment for your crimes. It would make sense if the government charged him for using some government OS. Besides the point that I consider restricting someone from acessing a computer to be tantamount to gagging, it is perverse that a convicted monopolist be beneficiated in such a way. Rui -- Keep the Lasagna flying! Today is Boomtime, the 23rd day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On 8/28/07, Dave Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We should all care, because there's actually an important question buried in this: to what extent is it acceptable for 'the government' to demand that someone make substantial or expensive changes in their life merely for its convenience? In both the US and moreso in Canada, there is significant emphasis on bilingualism, no? The line between conforming government to the people and people to the government is always arguable. If anything, it says we all need to advocate free software, so that the government can target freely available standards, instead of lining the wallets of vendors. Best, Chris
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Lars Hansson wrote: But, as I understand the issue, this is _not_ part of his specified punishment -- it's just a side-effect of the manner in which the government wants to impose a portion of his punishment. If he don't like it he could always take the alternative; going to jail. All things considered, being forced to run Windows for a few months isn't all that big a sacrifice when the alternative is sharing cell with Bubba. You appear to be arguing that someone convicted of a crime should lose rights under the law beyond those which the law specifies as being taken away. Is this a correct inference? I don't think think running Linux is a basic human right. This looks remarkably like a yes answer to my question. We've gotten pretty far off-topic, so I'm going to stop polluting this list. Dave -- Dave Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 04:37:09 -0500 Gilles Chehade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 11:19:40AM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Lars Hansson wrote: On 8/28/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why doesn't he run the monitoring software in a virtual machine? Because it would violate his parole? Who cares anyway? If you can't do the time don't do the crime. We should all care, because there's actually an important question buried in this: to what extent is it acceptable for 'the government' to demand that someone make substantial or expensive changes in their life merely for its convenience? It is acceptable to the extent that the guy did something illegal, is being punished for it and should consider himself happy that he is allowed to use a computer still. It's not about the guy, it's about the fact that Microsoft makes money out of his punishment. The fact that the government supports Microsoft is contrary to the free market philosophy that the US government preaches. Jona -- I am chaos. I am the substance from which your artists and scientists build rhythms. I am the spirit with which your children and clowns laugh in happy anarchy. I am chaos. I am alive, and tell you that you are free. Eris, Goddess Of Chaos, Discord Confusion
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Aug 29, 2007, at 11:57 AM, Jona Joachim wrote: It's not about the guy, it's about the fact that Microsoft makes money out of his punishment. I'm with you, Jona. The fact that the government supports Microsoft is contrary to the free market philosophy that the US government preaches. And it is ENTIRELY COINCIDENTAL that Microsoft during the 1990's threw a long series of million (10^6) dollar parties for members of the US Congress as they lobbied for various bills aimed at removing software freedom! :-) -- Jack J. Woehr Director of Development Absolute Performance, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 303-443-7000 ext. 527
Re: OT Strange Punishment
The main problem I see here is the government incentivating the purshase of Microsoft product. It's kinda dumb paying the guy pay to a company that has nothing to do witht he whole thing as a punishment for your crimes. It would make sense if the government charged him for using some government OS.
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 08:32:25PM -0300, Rafael Almeida wrote: The main problem I see here is the government incentivating the purshase of Microsoft product. It's kinda dumb paying the guy pay to a company that has nothing to do witht he whole thing as a punishment for your crimes. It would make sense if the government charged him for using some government OS. Besides the point that I consider restricting someone from acessing a computer to be tantamount to gagging, it is perverse that a convicted monopolist be beneficiated in such a way. Rui -- Keep the Lasagna flying! Today is Boomtime, the 23rd day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: OT Strange Punishment
Why doesn't he run the monitoring software in a virtual machine? On 8/28/07, Terry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I found this article interesting. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6204348.html -- Terry http://tyson.homeunix.org http://www.UnixByte.com
OT Strange Punishment
I found this article interesting. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6204348.html -- Terry http://tyson.homeunix.org http://www.UnixByte.com
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On 8/28/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why doesn't he run the monitoring software in a virtual machine? Because it would violate his parole? Who cares anyway? If you can't do the time don't do the crime. --- Lars Hansson
Re: OT Strange Punishment
Good point. On 8/28/07, Lars Hansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/28/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why doesn't he run the monitoring software in a virtual machine? Because it would violate his parole? Who cares anyway? If you can't do the time don't do the crime. --- Lars Hansson
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Lars Hansson wrote: On 8/28/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why doesn't he run the monitoring software in a virtual machine? Because it would violate his parole? Who cares anyway? If you can't do the time don't do the crime. We should all care, because there's actually an important question buried in this: to what extent is it acceptable for 'the government' to demand that someone make substantial or expensive changes in their life merely for its convenience? Note that he isn't complaining about being required to run monitoring software, just about being required to run Windows rather than his accustomed OS (presumably because Windows is the only OS that the government's preferred monitoring software will run on). Dave -- Dave Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT Strange Punishment
It just shows how these laws are designed to protect Microsoft at the expense of everyone else. Microsoft has been very effective over the past decades at lobbying congress to enclose the commons of computer science. There is a bill before Congress now to roll back patent protection, notably in the field of software. American users of OpenBSD might want to follow this struggle, which is running into massive opposition from non-comp-sci patent holders. On Aug 28, 2007, at 7:15 AM, Terry wrote: I found this article interesting. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6204348.html -- Terry http://tyson.homeunix.org http://www.UnixByte.com -- Jack J. Woehr Director of Development Absolute Performance, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 303-443-7000 ext. 527
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 11:19:40AM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Lars Hansson wrote: On 8/28/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why doesn't he run the monitoring software in a virtual machine? Because it would violate his parole? Who cares anyway? If you can't do the time don't do the crime. We should all care, because there's actually an important question buried in this: to what extent is it acceptable for 'the government' to demand that someone make substantial or expensive changes in their life merely for its convenience? It is acceptable to the extent that the guy did something illegal, is being punished for it and should consider himself happy that he is allowed to use a computer still. If he were using his ubuntu in a constructive way, he would not be forced to run Windows today. Tough luck. -- sysadmin coder @ http://www.evilkittens.org/ coder@ http://www.exalead.com/ [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 11:19:40AM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Lars Hansson wrote: On 8/28/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why doesn't he run the monitoring software in a virtual machine? Because it would violate his parole? Who cares anyway? If you can't do the time don't do the crime. We should all care, because there's actually an important question buried in this: to what extent is it acceptable for 'the government' to demand that someone make substantial or expensive changes in their life merely for its convenience? It is acceptable to the extent that the guy did something illegal, is being punished for it and should consider himself happy that he is allowed to use a computer still. If he were using his ubuntu in a constructive way, he would not be forced to run Windows today. Tough luck. But, as I understand the issue, this is _not_ part of his specified punishment -- it's just a side-effect of the manner in which the government wants to impose a portion of his punishment. There appears to be no real reason for it other than the government's convenience. You appear to be arguing that someone convicted of a crime should lose rights under the law beyond those which the law specifies as being taken away. Is this a correct inference? Whether or not you hold that opinion, I certainly don't agree with it -- it's essentially encouraging vigilanteeism. Anyone who thinks that the penalties specified by law don't go far enough should work to change the law, not just ignore it. Dave -- Dave Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 12:49:56PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: But, as I understand the issue, this is _not_ part of his specified punishment -- it's just a side-effect of the manner in which the government wants to impose a portion of his punishment. There appears to be no real reason for it other than the government's convenience. As I understand the issue, he agreed to have the goverment monitor all his computer activity. This requires that he run an operating system that will allow that. Does Ubuntu? I guess it's possible, and in that case it would be reasonable to request that the goverment monitor his current OS. Otherwise he needs to change OS or go back to jail. Wasn't that what he agreed to? I'm sorry to say that I suspect him to have known all the time that his parole officer would not be able to monitor his current system, and therefore had no intention to keep his side of the bargain. Emilio
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Tuesday 28 August 2007 10:32, you wrote: There is a bill before Congress now to roll back patent protection, notably in the field of software. American users of OpenBSD might want to follow this struggle, which is running into massive opposition from non-comp-sci patent holders. Software patents were just a bad idea to begin with. Patenting numbers and algorithms is ridiculous. I wish i had a patent on determining the total number of objects in a set when the numbers of objects in all mutually exclusive subsets of the set are known [my lame attempt to translate addition into patent-speak]. Imagine how much money i could make if i controlled such a basic operation! Oh wait, civilization as we know it would never have been able to develop and instead of working a civilized job at a computer i'd be in out hunting and gathering or (more likely) wouldn't have been born at all. Dan RamaleyDial Center 118, Drake University Network Programmer/Analyst 2407 Carpenter Ave +1 515 271-4540Des Moines IA 50311 USA
Re: OT Strange Punishment
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Emilio Perea wrote: On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 12:49:56PM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote: But, as I understand the issue, this is _not_ part of his specified punishment -- it's just a side-effect of the manner in which the government wants to impose a portion of his punishment. There appears to be no real reason for it other than the government's convenience. As I understand the issue, he agreed to have the goverment monitor all his computer activity. This requires that he run an operating system that will allow that. Does Ubuntu? I guess it's possible, and in that case it would be reasonable to request that the goverment monitor his current OS. Otherwise he needs to change OS or go back to jail. Wasn't that what he agreed to? I'm sorry to say that I suspect him to have known all the time that his parole officer would not be able to monitor his current system, and therefore had no intention to keep his side of the bargain. You may be right; all the information I have is what's shown up in this thread, and I've no idea whether anyone has implemented suitable monitoring software for Linux (or exactly how the 'monitoring' requirement was arrived at). But this incident does raise the question of what sort of presumably unintended costs 'the government' should be allowed to impose on _anyone_ at its whim -- and _that_ issue is one which should interest all of us (lest we find ourselves at its sharp end). Dave -- Dave Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT Strange Punishment
I think they simply have the monitoring software for Windows and not for Linux because it has not been bought/developed/whatever. Linux is not the point, it would be the same if he were using hardware that prevents the monitoring (such as a firewall). While I sympathize with what the fellow is running through, I find it a bit out of place that he complains about not being allowed to use Linux when he could be sitting in a cell. Basically the deal is It's ok you use a computer in a way we can watch the pr0n you l33ch. -- Die Gestalt
Re: OT Strange Punishment
But, as I understand the issue, this is _not_ part of his specified punishment -- it's just a side-effect of the manner in which the government wants to impose a portion of his punishment. If he don't like it he could always take the alternative; going to jail. All things considered, being forced to run Windows for a few months isn't all that big a sacrifice when the alternative is sharing cell with Bubba. You appear to be arguing that someone convicted of a crime should lose rights under the law beyond those which the law specifies as being taken away. Is this a correct inference? I don't think think running Linux is a basic human right. --- Lars Hansson
Re: OT Strange Punishment
Lars Hansson wrote: I don't think think running Linux is a basic human right. I'm not aware that using a computer is a basic human right...
