From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 28 22:27:02 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F26D7106566C for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:27:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com) Received: from mail.r-bonomi.com (mx-out.r-bonomi.com [204.87.227.120]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CD58FC19 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:27:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from bonomi@localhost) by mail.r-bonomi.com (8.14.4/rdb1) id p9SMR3HY075510 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:27:03 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:27:03 -0500 (CDT) From: Robert Bonomi Message-Id: <201110282227.p9SMR3HY075510@mail.r-bonomi.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20111028175401.17906e52@scorpio> Subject: Re: Fast personal printing _without_ CUPS X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:27:03 -0000 On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:54:01 -0400 Jerry supersciliously ponftificated: > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:35:20 -0500 (CDT) > Robert Bonomi articulated: > > > > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:04:19 -0400, Jerry > > pontificated: > > > > > > I buy my cars from known corporations and not the local chop-shop. > > > My drugs come form known pharmaceutical corporations and not the > > > local pusher. I like my device specific codes to come from those > > > best able to supply them, the OEM. > > > > "I am just going to reply to this one point because it is where > > you(sic) entire argument breaks down." > > > > That attitude is entirely acceptable for _your_ decision making. > > Asserting that nobody else shoul(sic) have any other alternatives to > > what you think is 'acceptable' is downright fascist. > > Who, or is it whom you choose to be your supplier is entirely a > decision you have to make based on your needs and desires. My point is > that anyone offering such products should be to some degree held > legally responsible to their worth. Of course, _every_ piece of freeware comes with a 100% satisfaction guarantee. If you don't like it, for _any_reason_whatsoever_, your money will be immediately refunded, in full. You don't even have to return the (in your view) "defective", product -- or even stop using it. > A "Fly by Night" operation is > totally unacceptable to me. If you find it acceptable then so be it. > Remember the adage: "You get what you pay for." > > By the way, calling me a Fascist when a significant number of users > of Open Source are socialist is rather funny. What 'some others' are, and what _you_ are, are unrelated subjects. Your insistance on trying to impose -your- standards on the world, and denying them the 'freedom of choice' to make their own decisions on the matter -- e.g. "anyone offering such products should be to some degree held legally responsible to their worth" -- is a fascist mind-set. You 'know better' than anybody else, what is 'right' _for_ them. BTW, I'd _love_ to see Microsoft "held legally respnsible" for _their_ product shortcomings. They'd be out of business in a week at the outside.