[PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Streaming Video on Linux

Michael Robinson robinsom at robinson-west.com
Sat Sep 4 14:20:16 PDT 2004

On Sat, 2004-09-04 at 06:42, Jeme A Brelin wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Michael Robinson wrote:
> > Ahh, stupid must be code for saying your a conservative.
> No, "stupid" is code for someone who doesn't know the difference between
> "your" and "you're".

Your not a conservative.  You are a majorly obnoxious pain in the neck
though.  You're also full of yourself.

Yeah, sexual dscrimination.  Don't talk unless you know what
discrimination is.  Let's see now, the traditional marriage
form can contribute to society where there are many religions
that shouldn't be discriminated against by a state religion
promoting same sex, cousin cousin, man dog, or whatever other
strange variation someone absolutely must get a license for.
But now we could just say that there are only so many religions
that aren't against marriage licenses for non traditional
couples and that there's no extra monetary burden associated
with declaring any couple a married one that requests such
recognition.  The other solution is to get rid of all state
benefits for all people.  Now that would be a landmark in
ending discrimination.

As far as the cousin cousin marriages.  If people in Multnomah
County didn't care about the law being and went ahead
handing out gay marriage licenses despite that, I have to laugh 
at you for suggesting that noone will try this with their cousin.  
After all, one has to keep that money in the family.

I can't speak for Paul, but Karen Minnis has, for years, been in the
pocket of big business.  Her concern is money, money, money.  The people
of Oregon can go hang, according to her voting records, so long as her
corporate patrons are getting their goods.

All this says is that you're a democrat and a socialist, possibly just
the latter.  I'd be very careful if I were in government to not label
a group as rich and target it for high taxes.  Fact is, society is
better off if big business is generous than if government with
it's overhead tries to bleed big business dry and redistribute
the wealth.  I can give you twenty dollars say.  Government has
the same twenty dollars to work with and can only give you one.  
Which system resulted in you profiting more?  Kerry isn't willing to
rein in lawsuits.  It's sad, indeed very sad that people are failing 
to see the destructive power of out of control liability and furthering
a society that's looks for a rich guy to par everything.

You watch a lot of Fox News, don't you?  Nobody would come up with the
term "flip flop" on their own.

I don't like FOX and practically never watch it, frankly I don't like 49
much either. 

They're buying proprietary software.

Also, every dollar that goes to Microsoft is a small contribution to
Microsoft's campaign against Free Software.
So if you buy proprietary software, you're against free alternatives?
Hmm, I don't see that as a pro competition let alone a
pro open source argument.  Microsoft is a big ship with a lot
of waste.  I don't believe that it is the job of government  
to innovate in software.  Someone else needs to do that and
present their alternative to government.  If you haven't 
noticed, the alternative community has a long ways to go
to present a consistent experience.  The other problem is
the volume of product that Microsoft produces, if everyone
stopped buying software today there would be massive job 
losses.  People won't praise free software if they associate 
it with job losses.

If you're using public money to develop software, that software should
belong to the public.  They don't copyright census data or trademark
signs.  If you're doing it with public funds, the public should retain
full control.

As for software, the best way we have, so far, to make sure that the
public is never exploited by a greedy, would-be software baron is the

In other words, public agencies should be required to use software that
belongs to the public and publish all of the software they develop
internally to the world under the GPL.

The GPL is awfully limiting when you need to profit off a piece of
software.  I like a number of books I've seen that adopt an improving
license that eventually turns into the GPL.  Except for when big
companies like IBM pay you to start and maintain a GPL program, like
Postfix, there's a real disincentive to use the GPL license right 

More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list