Avoiding LispWorks Personal annoyances
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: &optional combined with &rest
Next: local-time on Clozure CL windows vista 64 Can't resolve foreign symbol "gettimeofday"
From: Raffael Cavallaro on 11 Oct 2009 00:19 On 2009-10-10 21:05:32 -0400, Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku(a)gmail.com> said: > On 2009-10-11, Raffael Cavallaro > <raffaelcavallaro(a)pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com> wrote: >> On 2009-10-10 11:50:36 -0400, Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku(a)gmail.com> said: >> >>> I never read this garbage. The concept of a license is completely >>> meaningless to me. >> >> But it doesn't matter what you consider meaningless because you don't >> have the armed force of the state backing up your opinion. > > Right. But armed force can back *any* opinion whatsoever, right? But not legitimately. When it backs an opionion at odds with what the majority wishes it is illegitimate. When it backs an opinion that infringes the basic human rights of the minority it it illegitimate. > > The opinions that the Iranian state backs with force are not the same sets of > opinions that, say, the Irish government backs with force. The Iranian government is not a legitimate government (i.e., the latest elections were fraudulent). > > Maybe some states do back my opinion with armed force. Not the one I live in (i.e., not the US) and not any I'm aware of. > > In a state where reverse engineering is not illegal, if you try to use > force to stop someone from doing it, that would be construed as some > form of harassment, possibly criminal. Even in a state where reverse engineering *is* illegal, if you try to use force to stop someone from doing it that would be criminal. Your last example has nothing to do with the legal status of reverse engineering and everything to do with the distinction between state use of force and individual use of force. Generally speaking, legitimate governments have a monopoly on the legal use of coercive force. -- Raffael Cavallaro
From: Ron Garret on 11 Oct 2009 00:47 In article <harhad$js2$2(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: > Espen Vestre wrote: > > Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon(a)flownet.com> writes: > >> [says I'm a liar] > > > > Thank you for pointing that out. > > I am not a liar and it is incorrect to thank someone for falsely > claiming otherwise. Actually, you are a liar, because the text you replaced with "[says I'm a liar]" did not in fact say that you are a liar. So your claim that I called you a liar (then) is a lie. But telling a single lie does not make one a liar. What makes you a liar is that you make a habit of telling these kinds of lies. All this assumes, of course, that you have an adequate grasp of the English language. Perhaps you don't understand that lying is not synonymous with saying something that is factually untrue. rg
From: Ron Garret on 11 Oct 2009 00:53 In article <harh9i$js2$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: > Ron Garret wrote: > > In article <hapavk$es$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > > Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: > > > >> Assuming > >> generously a one-penny average marginal cost per download > > > > [says I'm a liar] > > No, you are. > > > It assumes that the cost of developing the software > > is amortized over a very large number of eventual downloaders. When the thing being downloaded is a Lisp development environment, this assumption is very unlikely to be true. > > But those costs are clearly non-zero, and they have to be > > recouped somehow if the business is to make even the 5% profit margin > > you so "generously" allow them. How do you propose they do that? > > Honest web businesses find something genuinely scarce to sell, perhaps > put ads on their web pages to cover server related costs, and do not > make obscene profits in the thousands of percent or more. Says you. In my world, honest businesses sell products for what the market will bear, and honest consumers choose to buy or not based on whether the product has sufficient value for them to justify the cost, not based on their uninformed speculation about the cost of production. If you think that a company's profits are "obscene" the honest response is to produce a competing product that undercuts their price, not to steal their product. rg
From: Espen Vestre on 11 Oct 2009 06:20 Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> writes: >> It assumes that the cost of developing the software > > is amortized over a very large number of eventual downloaders. Is Lisp getting *that* popular now? That's kind of scary. > Honest web businesses find something genuinely scarce to sell, perhaps > put ads on their web pages to cover server related costs, and do not > make obscene profits in the thousands of percent or more. You need a crash course in basic economy. -- (espen)
From: Espen Vestre on 11 Oct 2009 06:21
Espen Vestre <espen(a)vestre.net> writes: > You need a crash course in basic economy. Oops, should have been economics of course. -- (espen) |