What happened here was this 8-year-old was riding his bike in the presence of other similarly-aged children, when he hopped over some dirt into the path of an oncoming car, which was apparently damaged to the tune of $500-$1000 as a result. Said 8-year-old was given a $34 ticket for violating right of way. Sounds reasonable enough so far. It's also worth noting that he wasn't wearing a helmet.
"His mother was apparently pretty upset with us," Campbell said. "But in this case, the child caused the accident by pulling out in front of the car. The driver didn't have time to react."
Scott is a good enough candidate for a citation as any, according to Campbell. He said officers issue citations to many children throughout the year for not wearing helmets or for committing traffic violations on their bicycles. Officers draft the tickets in the child's name but usually expect the parents to pay them.
If no one is cited during an accident, insurance companies will demand that vehicle owners pay for their damages even if they are not at fault. It is a liability as well as a safety issue, Campbell said.
"I'm going to not pay this ticket, and Scott's definitely not going to pay it," McIntosh said, alluding to the fact that Scott has been saving his chore-based earnings to buy a battery-operated miniature Monster Truck. "He's an 8-year-old child. He does not understand what the right of way is."
If he's an 8-year-old child too young to understand that you aren't supposed to stay out of the way of oncoming cars, perhaps he shouldn't ride his bike unsupervised. Perhaps the cop felt the need to give the kid a ticket because it was abundantly obvious that the kid does not have parents that would teach him about such things as responsibility and consequences for one's actions.
For some reason, this piece is titled Unplugged: How Microsoft's Misunderstanding of Open Source Hurts Us All. Why, I have no clue, because nothing in the article gives any clue that all of us are being hurt by Microsoft's lack of understanding. That will not stop anyone from immediately imagining and subsequently even feeling the pain that Micro$oft is apparently causing them by means unknown.
"At the core of Ballmer's remarks is a fundamental misunderstanding not only of Open Source, but of software development as an art rather than a business." What? Is it not possible for something to be both art and business? Software can be art and software can be business. Not only that, but software can be both art and business simultaneously as well. And the point is?
This is what Steve Ballmer actually said: "Should there be a reason to believe that code that comes from a variety of people around the world would be of higher-quality than from people who do it professionally? Why is its pedigree better than code done in a controlled fashion? I don't get that. There is no road map for Linux, nobody who has his rear end on the line. We think it's an advantage a commercial company can bring--we provide a road map, indemnify customers. They know where to send email. None of that is true in the other world. So far, I think our model works pretty well."
Is any of that not true? If someone has a problem with Linux that its numerous developers aren't willing to provide an answer to, is someone's rear end on the line? Hell no, the user is just S.O.L. Granted, there are people who haven't seen the light of day since the mid-90's that are perpetually trolling Linux sites waiting for a question so they can answer it and feel validated, but it's not something most businesses are willing to bet their money on. MicroSuck's unreliability is legendary, but it might well be the best option available for most of the people who buy it. And maybe, just maybe, perhaps it isn't as bad as the Open Source worshippers would have us believe. It may not be the kind of software that an infinite number of people could come up with in an infinite amount of time, but it is predictable. People tend to like that. Not that I'm suggesting Linux isn't wonderful, but one can't help but wonder how evil MicroSoft gets people to continually BUY their software, when Linux is available for free. Yes, there's the "stupid" argument, but, then again, there might be other factors at work.
But the rant continues: "If MicroSoft developers rampantly fail to produce good software, but the company exceeds earnings estimates anyway, how many of those rears will be actually on the line? Very few, and maybe none at all."
If MicroSuck continually pumps out horrible software that nobody wants, people aren't going to buy it, and earnings will drop. Open-Sourcers will remind me that most people are idiots because they don't write their own gaming software. Perhaps that's true, but Micro$oft isn't a church of code, they're a business trying to make money and operating under the assumption that producing something that their customers want to buy and selling it to them for money is a good way to go about that.
But no, no, no! MicroSoft does not respect that software is art, pure and simple. They dare to try to use it to accomplish practical tasks. (Gasp!) "When Ballmer talks about rears being on the line, what really counts at Microsoft is meeting shipping targets -- meeting business goals -- not quality targets. It is all about revenue. And there is nothing wrong with that if we all just say it out loud and admit the truth. But we don't."
I think the major problem that fanatics of Open Source have with Micro$oft is that MicroSoft makes money, and they are either opposed to moneymaking in general, or specifically opposed to making money on something as sacred and delicate as software. They should all just say it out loud and admit the truth. But they don't.
Before you die-hard Micro$oft is $atan types start sending hate mail and berating me for being brainwashed into thinking Windows is the best operating system on the planet, let me assure you that I do not believe this to be at all true. Windows is to operating systems what Bud Light is to beer. Or to what McDonald's is to food. All are hugely popular, widely available, familiar, and easy. None are the best. A carefully crafted microbrew is far superior to a Bud Light. But if you just want something inoffensive and cold that will get you drunk, there's no need to waste good money and good microbrew when a Bud Light will do the job. A meticulously-prepared meal accompanied by a fine wine is infinitely preferable to a combo at McD's, but if you're on a road trip about to pass out from starvation wanting calorie-dense sustenance fast and don't want to spend a lot of money, the Golden Arches are calling your name. And if you just want to accomplish some basic tasks without taking the time and spending the money to appreciate fine code, by all means, MicroSoft is the way to go. MicroSoft is like Linux, in that both should be appreciated for what they are and not denounced for what they aren't.
I once said that I'd rather shovel horseshit for a living. Perhaps I should've been a bit more specific. I meant "horse shit" in the literal sense, as in excrement from a horse. And by "shovel" I referred to the process of moving material around with an actual shovel as the implement. For I'm already shoveling horseshit, as it turns out. My neatly organized piles and files are simply dressed-up horseshit, except with less value as fertilizer. And I shovel through it both manually and through the use of a dusty black Dell, so both my hands and the computer could be considered the shovel. And lest I give the impression that the horseshit in my office is limited to the various paper and electronic documents contained within, let's consider the verbal horseshit that pervades every square millimeter of these environs.
