Slashdot Mirror

It's been interesting to watch the fall of Google. First they drop their "do no evil" motto, then all developers are told to use macbooks, and it's been a steady decline into doin things like Apple since. They've dropped open standards in favor of proprietary closed ones, they've abandoned the ideals of open source, and heavily adopted the walled garden philosophy. How quickly the Apple methodology has seeped into all American tech companies is really astonishing. I guess that's what happens when millions of mindless hipsters throw billions of dollars to the wind.

They just told you idiots that shit

Relevant article.

Just leave the US market and the markets of AU and Japan and other software-patent countries. That's it, just leave. The market is big enough elsewhere to make yourselves rich by selling your product.

Once innovative, U.S. owned software start-ups are seen as leaving the US, the media will have its story.

Once the media has it's story, it will be written once and for all in the minds of the public as it really is- software patents kill innovation.

Once the public understands the issues as they really are, the lawmakers will be forced to do the right thing and ban software patents.

Yes, I am conspiring with my fellow developers right here on /.

And yes, you can develop software here in the US and sell it elsewhere with impunity, owing directly to this Supreme Court decision: http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2007/04/supreme_court_n.php/ .

And no, I am am not a lawyer. I am human.

I wouldn't touch G+ with an infinitely long bargepole anyway but on top of that it shows their utter hypocrisy as regards real names...consider their rejection of South Korea's demand for use of real names (Real Name Verification Law)...the following link discusses this issue in more detail if you are interested: http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2011/08/google_refuses.php

National had some the oldest fab equipment in the business. That place had equipment even China didn't want.

But you know what they say.
http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2005/09/real_men_have_f.php

Legally speaking IP infringement is not "OK".

In practice ... it's another story entirely.

It's better than a link to a page that links to the article.

Jobs' position is that making DRM work well is much easier if one has control over all the pieces. That undoubtedly is true.

If Microsoft's DRM were so excellent, the head of Yahoo Music would not be saying that it "doesn't work half the time." Now there's a ringing endorsement of a supposedly interoperable system from one of it's chief vendors. Players in the PlaysForSure paradigm had to be certified for use in the system, and there are still problems.

http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/20 07/02/yahoo_exec_says.php

It is not clear to me exactly what people expect Apple to do, but making its DRM work across a range of existing players that were never designed to work with FairPlay does not seem likely. See the other poster on how Microsoft's DRM requires a certain decoder chip. Apple obviously can't go back in time and change other manufacturer's hardware. Most of those players can't even play the open AAC format. At best, it would seem that the system could be made to work with future mp3 players that were designed for that purpose. Another potential solution would be some sort of software package to convert DRM into another format, but who is to say that existing players will play that format either? Interoperable DRM sounds okay in the abstract, but the devil is in the details.

Jobs is right. The best solution for consumers is no DRM at all. Period. Please stop trying to defend the RIAA's position. If they get what they want, there will be a huge DRM mess.

could be something as simple as an ISP blocking a classified site because it has a competing one

Except when it comes to broadband, that's not the environment we live in. Telcos and cables have structured the law such that there are large barriers to entry. The end result is that most people have one choice for cable and one choice for telco and in some regions, both choices are run by the same company.

In that kind of environment, which is what most people experience, markets aren't going to function. You may respond - "well lets eliminate the barriers to entry..." - and I'd be with you but until that happens, you have to pass legislation that constrains monopolies.

Witness Cox blocking Craigslist to get an idea of what I'm talking about. In that case, Cox runs both the local paper and local broadband. Craigslist severely threatens Cox's classified ads so Cox blocks Craigslist. Cox also has it set up so its next to impossible for another broadband player to come in and compete. Is that really the future you want for broadband?

Has no one looked closely at the picture. The opening of the garage is an OBVIOUS photoshop addon. I've seen pr0n that was better hacked together.

check it out for yourself :P http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/Go ogleGarage.jpg

To avoid loads of db queries and ads, the actual (rather uninteresting) picture is:

http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/Go ogleGarage.jpg

The links to the full article are here and here .

The link in the story is to an overview paragraph.

The links to the full article are here and here .

The link in the story is to an overview paragraph.