Putin's Internet Czar Wants To Ban Windows On Government PCs 307
SmartAboutThings writes: The Russian government is allegedly looking to ban Microsoft's Windows operating system, increase taxes on foreign technology companies, develop its homegrown OS and encourage local tech companies to grow. All these proposals comes from German Klimenko, Vladimir Putin's new 'internet czar, as Bloomberg describes him. In a 90-minute interview, Klimenko said forcing Google and Apple to pay more taxes and banning Microsoft Windows from government computers are necessary measures, as he is trying to raise taxes on U.S. companies, thus helping local Russian competitors such as Yandex and Mail.ru.
The obvious direction... (Score:5, Funny)
A re-branded version of some popular Linux distro...
Re:The obvious direction... (Score:4, Funny)
Red Ushanka? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe RedHat Siberian. Ships with a 20 year old kernel, nothing but Vi (no Vi, not Vim) and if you attempt to run binaries that require root privileges your home directory will be mapped to dev null and you will be logged out. Permanently.
Re: (Score:2)
What's funny about it? It's not like it hasn't been done before, although China did eventually drop Red Flag Linux...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Being that it's Russian, they will of course only have one binary on the box: EMACS. You'll have to do everything with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily, they totally can use it for everything... provided that they can figure out the right command-meta key sequence to do it with.
And? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. With the privacy blunder Microsoft committed with Windows 10, plus its NSA collaboration, it is not unreasonable for other countries to ban Windows for government work and spend the money on alternatives.
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
When the US government is in court with Microsoft over how they could use secret laws to claim Microsoft has to break the laws of other countries ... I fail to see how Microsoft, or any US company, can really be trusted.
This seems an entirely prudent response from Russia. I'm actually surprised more companies aren't actively wondering just how much Microsoft and others can be controlled by the US government.
When the US government is actively trying to ensure backdoors in encryption and the like, why would you assume there aren't any? You think these companies are going to make the international version with no US spying capabilities?
Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm actually surprised more companies aren't actively wondering just how much Microsoft and others can be controlled by the US government.
It's probably because if you're a big enough player, Microsoft will let you go over any and all of the source code that it has. So if your people can't find an NSA backdoor in the Windows source, your people probably aren't going find one in any other OS's source.
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm actually surprised more companies aren't actively wondering just how much Microsoft and others can be controlled by the US government.
It's probably because if you're a big enough player, Microsoft will let you go over any and all of the source code that it has. So if your people can't find an NSA backdoor in the Windows source, your people probably aren't going find one in any other OS's source.
Source code is meaningless if you don't compile the binaries yourself. AFAIK Microsoft has never allowed anybody to do so.
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, it's turtles all the way down.
If your secret law which requires you to lie about not having backdoors is invoked, you also have to lie about how people can check that you don't have backdoors. The presence of the secret law which says "you can't tell them about this" pretty much means there is no scenario in which you say "oh, well, gee, they're awesome and trustworthy".
By definition, the US government has taken the public stance that results in the conclusion "NO US COMPANY CAN BE TRUSTED".
Because as soon as you assert your laws trump the laws of the countries in which Microsoft etc do business, you essentially force everyone else to have to conclude "fuck you, go away, we now must assume you're not following the law".
I don't care how fucking big of a player you are, when Uncle Sam can compel them to lie ... you must assume they're lying, and that they couldn't tell you they were lying if they wanted to. Auditing about an NSA backdoor can't be trusted if the laws which would place such a hypothetical back door prevent you from admitting to that back door.
If Microsoft loses this case: [menafn.com]
nobody outside of the US can ever trust a US company ever again.
It really is that simple. Claiming auditing fixes this misses the entire point. Auditing in this case is a fucking fairy tale.
Re: (Score:3)
I work for one of M$'s largest enterprise customers. We had at one time the largest M$ email implementation in the world (that may have changed) and while they will bend over backwards adding special features and such for us, and provide excellent support, I've never seen one line of source code, nor have I ever heard of anyone who has at my place of business. Not that I'm saying it doesn't or hasn't happened...
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're in the US, losing the entire Russian government market is a blow to the balance of trade and local economy. This single contract is just representative of everything that's happening across the industry - it's far larger.
But Americans seem to WANT NSL's and are willing to sacrifice the entire tech sector, the basis of their economic growth, for an increased police state. Maybe they'll get to pick the size of their grey tunics.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I worry they'd want it both ways ... to keep their NSLs, and then to say "hey, you can't stop buying stuff from us, you signed a trade agreement".
There seems to be a belief they can base all of their economic growth on tech, but undermine and cripple it by making it unable to be trusted ... with the unsurprising outcome of not being able to link th
My guesses about Microsoft: (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Basically, Windows is dead. Countries will have to move away from using Microsoft products, since Microsoft has shown it cannot be trusted in ANY way. For example: Windows 10 phones home (A LOT) even with all reporting and telemetry disabled [betanews.com].
2) Microsoft wants to make money in the Facebook and Google way. Microsoft plans to mine all user data on all computers connected to the internet and sell the information.
3) The reason there will be no more versions of Windows is that Microsoft will do what Adobe Systems has done: Force users to move to a subscription model.
4) Windows users will isolate Windows from the internet, and use Linux on a different network with a cheap 2nd computer to connect to the internet. (But how to allow information interchange between the 2 networks?)
5) In response to users isolating Windows from the internet, Microsoft will make Windows stop working after a few days of no internet connection. Adobe Systems does that, in my experience, with CS6. (CS6 is the last version before the forced move to a subscription model.)
6) Satya Nadella, the new Microsoft CEO, was chosen because he was the least annoying candidate. He is apparently not the real controlling manager, but only someone to advertise.
7) Microsoft has a contract with secret U.S. government agencies to make Windows into what users consider to be malware.
8) Because Microsoft often releases buggy software, possibly because it is paid to do so by secret U.S. government agencies, Windows 10, with its many ways to connect to the internet, is now FAR less secure than before.
Not a guess, because verified by others: Microsoft is shockingly badly managed. The cover of the January 16, 2013 issue of BusinessWeek magazine has a large photo of former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer with the headline calling him "Monkey Boy". See the BusinessWeek cover in this article: Steve Ballmer Is No Longer A Monkey Boy, Says Bloomberg BusinessWeek [businessinsider.com]. The BusinessWeek cover says "No More" and "Mr.", but that doesn't take much away from the fact that the magazine called Ballmer Monkey Boy -- on its cover.
Slashdot commenters called Ballmer "Monkey Boy" for years before BusinessWeek called him that on the cover of its magazine.
Worst CEO in the United States: Quote from an article in Forbes Magazine [forbes.com] about Steve Ballmer: "Without a doubt, Mr. Ballmer is the worst CEO of a large publicly traded American company today." Another quote: "The reach of his bad leadership has extended far beyond Microsoft when it comes to destroying shareholder value -- and jobs." (May 12, 2012)
7 and 8 are just guesses, but here is evidence: (Score:5, Interesting)
D-Link: Reverse Engineering a D-Link Backdoor [devttys0.com] (Oct. 12, 2013)
Arris: 600,000 Arris cable modems have 'backdoors in backdoors', researcher claims [thestack.com] (Nov. 20, 2015)
Juniper Networks: Juniper drops NSA-developed code following new backdoor revelations [arstechnica.com] (Jan. 10, 2016)
Cisco: Snowden: The NSA planted backdoors in Cisco products [infoworld.com] (May 15, 2014)
Netgear: Netgear Patch Said to Leave Backdoor Problem in Router [cio.com] (April 23, 2014)
Windows 8: NSA Backdoor Exploit in Windows 8 Uncovered [technobuffalo.com] (Aug. 22, 2013)
Windows: NSA "backdoor" mandates lead to a computer-security FREAK show [consumeraffairs.com] Quote: "Microsoft Windows OS vulnerable to hackers, thanks to National Security Agency requirements." (March 6, 2015)
Windows: NSA Built Back Door In All Windows Software by 1999 [washingtonsblog.com] (June 7, 2013)
Hard drives: Breaking: Kaspersky Exposes NSA's Worldwide, Backdoor Hacking of Virtually All Hard-Drive Firmware [dailykos.com] (Feb. 17, 2015)
Is every backdoor the work of the NSA? There is no way of knowing.
Re: (Score:2)
Not if their objectives are security. It will cost more money than the licensing itself and probably won't pay for itself in a while but at least they'll have piece of mind. At least until the next hard drive hack by the NSA.
What amazes me is the lack of cooperation between Russia and the US. Bunch of children throwing rocks at each other.
Re: (Score:2)
The price will go up for IT stuff in Russia, too. Brazil tried to do the same thing in the 1980's, and they wound up with $1000 Commodore 64 clones.
Good idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Hopefully Russian computer scientists will focus on either making ReactOS a usable replacement (better for us in the West trying to dump Windows), or making their own Linux distro (I suggest they call it... Kremlinux), which will likely be better for them in the long run.
"Free as in Freedom" (Score:3, Funny)
Any government interested in keeping its data and secrets safe but runs Windows is likely populated by imbeciles.
But an OS designed to serve Putin's interests is a better alternative? The geek mind at work is a fascinating thing to watch.
Re:"Free as in Freedom" (Score:4, Insightful)
For Putin's government, I would say an OS designed to serve Putin's interest is probably a better alternative for Putin - and that's what we're discussing.
Re: (Score:3)
For Putin's government, I would say an OS designed to serve Putin's interest is probably a better alternative for Putin - and that's what we're discussing.
No, the grand parent stated:
Hopefully Russian computer scientists will focus on either making ReactOS a usable replacement (better for us in the West trying to dump Windows)
So a Putin sponsored ReactOS is declared as a better option for the West to move to from Windows. It is absurd, and it was duly and accurately called out as stupidity. Stupidty that got rated +5 insightfull no less.
Re: (Score:2)
For Putin's government, I would say an OS designed to serve Putin's interest is probably a better alternative for Putin - and that's what we're discussing.
No, the grand parent stated: Hopefully Russian computer scientists will focus on either making ReactOS a usable replacement (better for us in the West trying to dump Windows)
So a Putin sponsored ReactOS is declared as a better option for the West to move to from Windows. It is absurd, and it was duly and accurately called out as stupidity. Stupidty that got rated +5 insightfull no less.
ReactOS is open source. If Russia contributes to it, it helps everybody in the world that can access the source. The fact that it helps Putin does not mean it cannot help other people.
Of course, if Putin wanted to, the Russian government could make a closed-source fork of ReactOS, but that's obviously not what I was hoping for--hence why I started the statement with "hopefully".
Re: (Score:2)
For Putin's government, I would say an OS designed to serve Putin's interest is probably a better alternative for Putin - and that's what we're discussing.
No, the grand parent stated:
Hopefully Russian computer scientists will focus on either making ReactOS a usable replacement (better for us in the West trying to dump Windows)
So a Putin sponsored ReactOS is declared as a better option for the West to move to from Windows. It is absurd, and it was duly and accurately called out as stupidity. Stupidty that got rated +5 insightfull no less.
ReactOS is open source. If Russia contributes to it, it helps everybody in the world that can access the source. The fact that it helps Putin does not mean it cannot help other people.
Of course, if Putin wanted to, the Russian government could make a closed-source fork of ReactOS, but that's obviously not what I was hoping for--hence why I started the statement with "hopefully".
Because "open source" and "full source audit for security holes both accidental and deliberate" are synonymous? If you've got a code base of hundreds of thousands of lines, and Putin's employees add a bunch of features and fixes that comprise 10s of thousands of lines, how exactly do you tell the good from the bad? Sure, some bad stuff can eventually get caught. Sure, it's easier to catch than with closed source. Let's not pretend though that KGB agents are beyond trying to hide problems in plain sight that
Re: (Score:2)
Any government interested in keeping its data and secrets safe but runs Windows is likely populated by imbeciles.
But an OS designed to serve Putin's interests is a better alternative? The geek mind at work is a fascinating thing to watch.
wtf? Uh, yeah! Putin, being the head of the Russian government, would indeed be strongly interested in a home-rolled OS to avoid Microsoft funneling state secrets to the USA. How thick do you have to be to not see this?
Windows bashing (Score:2)
Any government interested in keeping its data and secrets safe but runs Windows is likely populated by imbeciles.
Hopefully Russian computer scientists will focus on either making ReactOS a usable replacement (better for us in the West trying to dump Windows), or making their own Linux distro (I suggest they call it... Kremlinux), which will likely be better for them in the long run.
It's funny because Microsoft is evil.
Seriously though, a government running Windows must be run by imbeciles, but a Kremlin doctored version of ReactOS or Linux would be better? Pot meet kettle my friend.
I get Windows is not the right tool for everything, but neither is it the wrong tool for everything. I don't really see a government ban on Windows across the board makes any sense. Nobody in gov will ever run MS Office, nothing in gov will every be developed in .NET, and all to protect from what exactly? H
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of kremvax... guess that kinda dates me...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good idea (Score:4, Insightful)
ReactOS is a horrible Windows XP clone, what's the point of that operating system in the 21st century?
Proprietary legacy applications with no *nix support. There's billions of dollars invested in it.
Re: (Score:2)
StaLinux?
Re: (Score:2)
Uputintu?
Re: (Score:2)
So the government can't switch away from Windows, because they need to be interoperable... with themselves? Well, that does seem like government logic, indeed. I'm so glad I pay taxes so that these virtuous and profoundly intelligent people can watch over my safety.
I'm not quite sure what is more ignorant here, not grasping the value of dozens of government agencies needing to be interoperable with themselves, or your complete lack of understanding just who the hell uses Windows on this planet, as if the majority of companies today are running fucking BSD or some shit.
A government can impose interoperability by mandating use of a single OS.
You're of course obviously right that Windows is the dominant desktop OS on the planet, but you're quite wrong if you think the average pleb is incapable of using a *nix. You think the accountants and legal teams in Apple, IBM, Google, Red Hat, etc. are using Windows?
Re: (Score:2)
You think the accountants and legal teams in Apple, IBM, Google, Red Hat, etc. are using Windows?
Maybe not the ones at Apple, but I totally believe the accountants and lawyers at the rest of them are using Windows. Maybe some MacOS too, but they're sure as shit not using Linux distros for their Desktop applications.
Re: (Score:2)
OSX (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt it - it ties far more closely to the overall Russian drive towards nationalistic solutions and tendencies. Even though Linux (we all know that's what they'll use) is not purely Russian (or even a fraction of same), it does allow them to fork the kernel and make it that way. Sort of like NoKo's 'Red Flag Linux', but without all the governmental spyware and crippling (well, as far as we know...)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.penny-arcade.com/c... [penny-arcade.com]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
He is an old KBG agent. You can bet your life on him being paranoid beyond what is healthy.
He doesn't run anything that he doesn't have full control over and he doesn't care about idealism.
Follow the Chinese (Score:5, Insightful)
In Soviet Ru- aww, screw it. (Score:5, Insightful)
I can actually see a good reason for Russia dumping Windows... a Linux-based system gives them internal control over the source code to the OS they use - they can fork it and do whatever they want with it internally.
The taxation thing? That's just governments doing what governments tend to do - extract more money from those who produce wealth, especially from outside the borders where it's more politically palatable (and in some cases highly desirable). Shit, they've been doing this for as long as the word "tariff" has existed, and the "on a computer" aspect doesn't really make it all that much different.
Not sure if the pimped local options (e.g. Yandex) are any better or worse, though - only the Russian public can ultimately decide that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Economists have long understood protectionism as an economic negative. This will destroy wealth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure the move to impose additional taxation on the technology giants in Russia has much more to do with the government seeking a way to reciprocate sanctions in a way that hurts than with an actual strategy.
That said, the idea to rid Russian government computers away of US-made software in favor of domestic solutions has been circulated for a while. It still remains to be seen where they are today in their capability to replace the functionality, however forking a free OS and an office suit can't
Re: (Score:2)
There is a point where the GPL demands code changes be published. This of course will not happen. I'm sure it's just the same with China.
Nice! (Score:2)
First this guy shows up America by bombing ISIS into oblivion - which the US hadn't been able (aka willing) to do in over a year.
Now he wants to ban Windows from government computers?
He's definitely doing something right and setting a good example for other countries - despite being an organized crime sleazebag mobster.
Google may just leave if the taxes are high enough (Score:3)
Obligatory poster (Score:5, Funny)
You know which one [imgur.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I love the way the communism is happening on an iMac.
I'm waiting for the dry humor (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, for secure systems, you are free to develop your own organizational internet with all the built in protections you can muster. That should take about, what, a few days for you?
Not really about Windows (Score:2)
I think this is more about not sending money to the US based firm, Microsoft. I do applaud anyone taking a hard look at what is best/most appropriate for their environment but this seems more about giving US companies a bloody nose than it does about the OS choice itself.
Re:Not really about Windows (Score:5, Informative)
I disgree. I think Windows is both seriously crap for usability and inherently very insecure when compared to most Linux distros, and who knows what info Microsoft (and therefore the US gov) can/is using Windows to collect/phone home with.
Factor in that Linux is free (in both senses), has inspectable source code, is more standards-compliant and supports more hardware, and has more free professional-grade apps, and the decision is (or should be) a complete no-brainer, especially for governments.
In fact it boggles my mind why anyone is still choosing to use Windows for anything at all, except maybe gaming, and then only because many games devs still dont make Linux versions of AAA games, although tthat seems to be (too slowly for me) changing too.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not arguing against any of your points. I just don't think that is what motivated the decision.
Im amazed anoyne wants to use Widnwos (Score:5, Insightful)
Heck I dont even trust Windows/Microsoft for home use. If I was Russia or any Government (including the US) I wouldnâ(TM)t allow any PC with Windows on it at all. Who knows what information Windows (especially 10) is collecting and phoning home with, or how many NSA back doors and just plain stupid security holes it has.
Anyone have details? (Score:2)
I'm curious how Microsoft and Apple would be compelled to pay more taxes - it's not as if they're manufacturing their computers there. If it's a tax on sales, that's not going to hit the companies... it'll hit the Russian consumers trying to buy Macs and Windows computers.
It's kind of funny, because I remember there was a lot of prominent Apple product placement in that "I will tear off my shirt for Putin" political ad - so their computers and phones are apparently popular there.
Re: (Score:2)
Sales tax can mean Russian consumers may buy computers made in Russia (if there are any) but this may also encourage Russian firm to manufacture computers.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is more the old Soviet/MidEast trick of using overblown language to cover up their lack of anything imaginative..."We gonna kill you with a thousand deaths"...or better Erdogan, "U.S. support of the Kurds is causing a sea of blood"...yeah, that's it...
Very good idea. (Score:4, Insightful)
"The Russian government is allegedly looking to ban Microsoft's Windows operating system"
Aaaand... that's an extremely good idea. There is an enormous problem and it's called 'Restricted level networks' in governments everywhere; combined, they provide an attacker an enormous treasure trove of information, and they are installed, configured and used by morons^Hnot very apt computer users. To expose yourself additionally to an American company that can just open the floodgates at a simple request out of Washington, is folly.
Re: (Score:2)
The only problem I see is that most users at least a familiar with Windows and how it generally works.
There are a lot of malicious things that can attack a Linux surface as well and if users are ignorant they may be much more easily tricked into exploiting a Linux box than a Windows box.
I just know from experience that people who throw up a Linux box without really understanding how to use Linux tend to get their box owned pretty quickly if it is exposed to the Internet and they don't keep up on patches.
I d
web server logs and russian companies (Score:2, Troll)
.
Other search bots do not seem to have any problems following the instructions I placed in the robots.txt. For some reason, yandex, mail.ru and bing think they're entitled to special treatment.
Obl. (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia, Windows bans you.
Re: (Score:2)
In "free" USA, Microsoft owns you.
Refreshing honesty (Score:3, Interesting)
Well at least, unlike France and Spain for example, he's being honest about his true reason for arbitrary and specious attacks and restrictions on, and extortion of, US tech companies.
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't have to be THE reason, or the only reason. There are at least three possible reasons - protectionism in software, privacy/security concerns, and desire to "bite back" because of sanctions. They probably all come into play here, at different degrees of importance.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt that very much. Culturally, Russia has been looking to the west for the last 300 years, and it is the desire of many in the intellectual elite to be recognized as a European country - no amount of sanctions, economical integration with the Asian countries and even limited military conflict are going to change that. Putin has always wanted the West to be much friendlier than it turned out to be. While there may be a desire to limit the psych-ops via the Internet, that war is being waged with similar
Re: (Score:2)
While the intellectual elite might look westward, Putin sure doesn't seem to be one of them. He is on-record as pining for the old days of the Iron Curtain and Soviet Union, having made statements... publicly, mind you... that its dissolution was: "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century". That's hardly the outlook of any kind of progressive. And his actions, especially the invasions of Georgia and Ukraine, sure look like a desire to return to the cold war Soviet ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Well at least, unlike France and Spain for example, he's being honest about his true reason for arbitrary and specious attacks and restrictions on, and extortion of, US tech companies.
I wonder how much of a financial stake he or his family has in those companies...and there's also his own company (LiveInternet) which appears to be something similar to Yahoo's homepage, albeit more barebones.
And who can blame them? (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, who can blame them?
Win 10 is basically spyware, and it would be the NSA's wet dream to have it installed on computers within the Russian government's offices.
I mean, how much easier could it get? No more having to spear-phish Russian officials and trick them into installing malware or spyware, just turn on the "Spy On Me" feature and paw through all their documents, emails, chats, forms, and file stores at will. Download nightly "backups" of their PCs and have a field day.
I don't want Win 10 installed on my PC, and I hardly have any secrets to keep.
Home grown OS? (Score:4, Funny)
Yup (Score:4, Insightful)
Klimenko owns a torrent site, opposes restrictions (Score:2)
Re:From a Russian perspective (Score:4, Insightful)
Banning Windows is like banning Oxygen (Score:2)
Oxygen constitutes 80% of everything in the atmosphere right now, and is the basis for most common exothermic reactions. But, to be clear, it's not really necessary. There are other oxidizers, and other compounds which many things could be converted over to use. Some applications simply wouldn't be able to run anymore. Like mammals. But that's really just a reason to create new, better organisms from scratch. We know how they work, so it should be pretty easy. Right?
Oxygen is dangerous, even toxic, stuff, a
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Oxygen constitutes 80% of everything in the atmosphere right now, and is the basis for most common exothermic reactions. But, to be clear, it's not really necessary. There are other oxidizers, and other compounds which many things could be converted over to use. Some applications simply wouldn't be able to run anymore. Like mammals. But that's really just a reason to create new, better organisms from scratch. We know how they work, so it should be pretty easy. Right?
Oxygen is dangerous, even toxic, stuff, and I can absolutely agree that something better is a good idea.
You go first.
You're an imbecile. Plenty of governments, large corporations and other institutions have been able to dump Windows (or never run Windows to begin with) and are doing quite fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You better be real careful...
Re:Banning Windows is like banning Oxygen (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Ha! Yup - brain out of gear, clearly - I just sat right in that one! :-D
80% oxygen would make for some bad-ass bonfires, though.
Re: (Score:2)
While our competing companies in Russia or spending their cycles mounting the CD drive from the command line and rebuilding the kernel to fix GPU failures, we'll be adding the innovation customers in a free market would choose to buy.
I haven't ever had to mount a CD from the terminal or rebuild my kernel, but it's nice that those options are available in case I need to.
Guess how fucked you are if your CD or GPU are malfunctioning in Windows?
Re: (Score:2)
While our competing companies in Russia or spending....
There is so much wrong with that posting that I don't know where to start. But the short list:
...mounting the CD drive from the command line....
While that always remains an option for those so inclined, it hasn't been necessary on major desktop Linux distribution for many years.
...rebuilding the kernel to fix GPU failures...
While that always remains an option for those so inclined, it hasn't been necessary on major desktop Linux distribution for many years.
...we'll be adding the innovation...
By "we'll", I presume you mean Microsoft. Microsoft hasn't been innovative in any positive manner in over 20 years.
...customers in a free market would choose to buy.
We haven't had a free marke
Re: (Score:2)
We haven't had a free market in operating systems in over 25 years, which is about the time frame that Bill Gates forced computer manufacturers to put only Windows on computers.
My favorite part of the article was when the writer said that it was unclear why Russia wouldn't want Windows on government computers. I almost laughed out loud. The writer actually phrased it in such a way as to imply that Russia would somehow be inflicting harm on itself by kicking Windows out.
Really? Bill Gates hold your family hostage so you couldn't build your own PC and load Linux or go out and buy a Mac? People have always had alternatives, they are just not as simple or cheap as buying the "Black Friday Special" at your local big box electronics store.
It's possible to have an unfree market without having a gun pointed to your head.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps we could innovate a functioning grammar checker?
Re:Hillary, is that you? (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
>> they can pay their fare share
It looks like we should also continue to invest in education. That would be the only "fair" thing to do.
Re: (Score:2)
I feel you man, I feel you!
+1
Re: (Score:2)
Gold star for you, special snowflake!
That only works for grades one to three.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Slightly off-topic, but the only way to make sure everyone pays their fair share would be to remove *all* loopholes/deductions/credits, and set a single tax rate (say, 15-20%). For charity's sake, the first $x/year income can be exempt (where x = 120% of poverty rate or similar metric).
Yes, a flat tax. But, it is ultimately fair for a zillionaire to pay in 20% of his income, which would be way larger than 20% of Joe Sixpack's middle-class income. As a beneficial side-effect, people would suddenly get very i
Re: (Score:2)
I trust and am hoping that you're not one of those folks.
I'm a firm believer that you need a personal corporation for the tax advantages and writing unlimited checks to political candidates.
so even if they were taxed at 100% of income, the US government would not see a dime of it.
Unless you're an American citizen working in Russia. You still have to file a tax return and pay taxes for your worldwide income to the IRS.
Re: (Score:3)
Such a simple system becomes exploitable. The exploits demand countermeasures, and that gets complicated.
For example, you tax income. But what is income? Company car? Company house? Company staff discount? You've set up a system where employers and employees agree to non-monetary compensation as a form of tax avoidance, which means you have to add all sorts of rules about calculating equivalent taxable values.
Re: (Score:2)
With the baby boomers retiring, the work force getting smaller, and Social Security/Medicare consuming two-thirds of the federal budget in the next 20 years, someone will have to pay for all those taxes. Since corporations are people, they can pay their fare share.
Ah, you noticed the problem with the Republican/Tea Party platforms - they want to reduce taxes without increasing the deficit, without cutting military spending, so that means health care and social security have to go. Not immediately, of course, they will phase this in 20 years after the seniors who voted them into power have died, so it's the voters' kids and grandkids who get screwed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with that reasoning is that it's entirely irrational. Yes, some of what you pay for a product goes to pay the taxes. Your income comes from where? Would you say that you employer pays the income taxes for Microsoft when you buy a product from them? The business gets its income from where? Would you say your employer's customers pay your employer, who pays you your salary, who buys Word which portions of the sales price going to the taxes that Microsoft pays? And who pays the person who purchased
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the notion that a czar can be appointed, or self-appointed, just doesn't make any sense to Russians. Funny as this sounds, the expression "internet king" could be a better fit, even though "king" in this context in Russian would imply being #1 in a field rather than having actual authority over others in it.
Re: (Score:2)
No, because it's a massively overused term, which seems completely random and pointless for an over inflated title, and has NOTHING to do with any historical meaning. Think King, Emperor, Dictator, Supreme Leader, High Priestess.
Czar sounds like a bullshit title which is handed out for no defensible reason.
So, much like we don't have Privacy Emperor, and Internet Emperor ... why the hell do we even call these things 'czar'?
Re: (Score:2)