"Not jobs, just the facilities. We've got robots!"
Either way, it's still "production capacity" which is a boost for the local economy. While more jobs might be desirable, for the overall economy the production capacity is still a good thing.
Copyright piracy is a LEGAL term over 200 years old, which has been incorrectly "borrowed" colloquially in recent years. It has been promoted by Big Content because it causes people to associate "downloading" for personal use with crime... which it is not.
When you use the term "piracy" improperly, you do the copyright trolls' work for them.
"I really dont have stomach for people who try to defend behavior thats about on the same level as shoplifting candy bars by saying "but no look Ubuntu is on demonoid too!""
I'm not trying to "defend" behavior. But on the other hand, I'm not trying to conflate non-criminal behavior with criminal behavior, as you are doing.
The FCC has the authority to designate a communications service either a common carrier or an information service.
Reply to This Share
In the GENERAL case, yes. But Congress specifically exempted Internet businesses from Title II. It was one of the stupidest things Congress has ever done, and the decision was (of course) prompted by lobbyist money.
Can someone explain why they didn't just do this instead? Does this classification require legislation or something?
They didn't do this because Congress explicitly exempted Internet businesses from Common Carrier classification (known as Title II).
The FCC has several times since tried to classify ISPs as common carriers, but Congress (almost certainly due to lobbying) has refused to allow it.
I definitely agree. Classifying ISPs as Title II Common Carriers would eliminate a great many of today's ills. It would just take enough people to badger Congress (or alternatively, a Congress with the cojones to stand up to lobbyists) to do it.
"Omly the US had a fucked up volontary system for reporting due taxes."
That "fucked up volontary system" is due to the way our country is structured.
States cannot tax transactions that happen in other States. That's because each State is sovereign. So States impose a "use" tax (which actually is not "voluntary") on the use of the item within the State. Because it is not a tax on the transaction, and only involves inside-State use, it is a legal tax.
The Federal government, likewise, has no authority to tax on behalf of States.
That's the way our country is designed. That's the way it's supposed to be. If you don't like it, go somewhere else... don't try to mess up the government of my states and country by imposing what YOU think is a "fair" tax.
OK, it doesn't say in the article. Someone should elaborate on that "despair of the hardware companies".
Yes, and particularly this bit about "you can't do it in the United States." That seems a rather outrageous claim to me, especially now that many corporations are moving their manufacturing and production facilities back to the United States.
"Torrenting has legitimate use, but Demonoid was truly for pirating."
Nope. I happen to know that Demonoid carried legal content, because I personally used it for such.
And please get your terminology straight. Copying for personal use is NOT "piracy". Piracy is a legal term, and it involves copyright infringement for profit.
Don't care about it, look at it as a throw away fly by night service as Google WILL shit all over it trying to make it FB and when it don't make FB money? It'll be shitcanned
They did the shitting a long time ago. The difference is that instead of killing it, they decided to FORCE people to use it by consolidating all their other services around it.
That won't work, and it doesn't work. I quit using most of the services that require Google+ membership. I quit commenting on YouTube. Etc. Rather than be coerced, to the extent I reasonably can I'm just abandoning their platform, and I will go with alternatives instead.
Google thought they had us by the gonads. They were wrong. 'Bye, Google.
"Would you be willing to wager that legal activity was even more than 10%? Because I wouldnt."
In the U.S., it doesn't matter. IANAL, but legally speaking, the amount of illegal vs legal activity is irrelevant. It only has to have genuine legitimate uses to remain legal. Anything else would constitute punishing law-abiders for the actions of others.
"There are legitimate uses for torrents, but demonoid wasn't about distributing Linux iso's or other open source projects. It was about pirating movies and music."
Actually, no. If you wanted hit movies or music, Demonoid was among the last places you would look. It might have what you were looking for, but probably not.
Demonoid's forte was along the line of more obscure works, like hard-to-find books and such.
But the only way to do that legitimately is to rule out confounding factors... and in a case like this, there are so many potential confounding factors that it may well be a near-impossible task.
"Dell, Acer, and others announced 28" 4K monitors over the last week at CES, all right around $799. A little bit pricier than the Seiki, but they come with DisplayPort and are able to do 4K@60Hz, IIRC."
That's good. 39" at that resolution (as in OP) might be great for a TV, but it isn't for a monitor, at all. For good ergonomics, you'd have to sit too far away from it, which makes the extra size pretty much pointless.
"I am currently using 2-27" 2560x1440 with a 3rd 1080p that I watch TV and movies while I am working. I probably won't upgrade until HDMI 2.0 becomes commonplace."
"Four editors side-by-side each with over a hundred lines of code, and enough room to spare for a project navigator, console, and debugger. Enough room to visualize the back-end service code, the HTML template, the style-sheet, the client-side script, and the finished result in a web browser â" all at once without one press of Alt-tab."
Not even. When I'm programming, I currently use 2 monitors with total horizontal resolution of 3600 pixels... and I still have to switch windows A LOT.
2 of these would be sweet. But they're too large. If you put the same number of pixels in a 28" screen, two of them would be just about right.
"If the above scenario takes place it will mean that other jurisdictions (Singapore, Korea, China, Taiwan) will end up as the chief source of expertise for these vehicles and end up with the largest portion of the profits."
Since when has this mattered in the past? In the U.S., some lawsuit-happy people have nearly always jumped in and ruined it for everybody else.
I did not say this was a desirable outcome. I simply stated it was a pretty predictable outcome, given other such issues in the past.
It happened in the very beginning with automobiles (vs. horses).
It happened with home-built (now called "experimental") aircraft.
It happened with antilock brakes.
It happened with computerized cars.
Given time, I could probably think of about 100 examples.
"The closest the real world approaches your definition is that no rational person knowingly produces a good which, at completion, will be valued less than the opportunity cost of its production and distribution. But people can be wrong, and goods which have already been produced are often worth less than their original cost."
But if you attempt to calculate value, you generally find that value will be approximately equal to cost of production plus distribution. This is true because of simple supply-and-demand. Unless the commodity in question is unusually rare, then if the value (its worth in trade for other commodities) much exceeds cost of production + distribution, more will be made and distributed, bringing the PRICE down. If, on the other hand, its worth in trade is much less than the cost of production + distribution, it will not be produced, bringing the PRICE back up because supply is reduced in proportion to demand.
It is easy to show this on a graph.
But the point I was getting at back in the beginning is this: when market PRICE is completely detached from VALUE, your market is irrational. When what a commodity is sold for is completely unrelated to any kind of actual value to society of that commodity (whether you want to go by that equation or some other measure of trade value), your market is subject to bubbles and other such potential disasters.
This is what I was referring to when I stated that market PRICE is not necessarily related to VALUE. When the price of something that is a classical scarce commodity like Bitcoin can fluctuate 50% in a single day, then your price is irrationally detached from value, and you should beware of investing.
"Perhaps according to Marx's long-discredited labor theory of value, but not according to any modern economic theory. The fact that you can easily spend a fortune making something that you have no use for and which no one else wants to buy (i.e., which has no value) should make that obvious."
Pick up just about any college textbook on Microeconomics 101. It will explain to you that "value" has a specific definition, and a specific meaning, and that isn't it.
Quit bringing your psuedo-Marxist economic theories into it. This is plain old capitalist college microeconomics. Try reading about it sometime.
"If you have to spend 3 million dollars on custom hardware development just to get performance parity with a COTS general purpose CPU... you'd be hard pressed to call that "well" by any measure."
Must I repeat this yet again? I was using "well" to mean it was possible to get it to run well on custom hardware. GP's comment may have had a different definition of "well". We know this, we acknowledged it a long time ago, and this is all just a rehash of what has gone before.
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not trying to be rude. But comes a point at which I tire of repeating myself.
If you're any good with a small soldering iron, you can take a micro-USB cable and a mini-USB cable, hook up a battery and a AWUS036NH 2W wifi adapter, and have wifi control 1/2 mile away from your cell phone. Maybe farther, depending on conditions. It's small, it's portable, and it' legal.
"If lots of people think you're using a term badly, then maybe, just maybe, you're at fault - did that ever cross your mind?"
And your definition of "well" means consuming X power and Y hardware?
I will repeat this for you one more time: *I* was the one who wrote above that there could be misunderstandings about the meaning of "well". You haven't been adding ANYTHING to the conversation.
"Both the value and the price are determined by buyers and sellers."
NO, they aren't! Pick up a book on economics. Value has a specific definition, and it is not the same as price! Value is, as I clearly stated earlier, cost of production + cost of distribution. That is its definition. Which, by the way, IS objective.
Value and price are economically DIFFERENT things. My apple example was just an attempt to put it in non-technical terms, for someone who obviously does not know economics.
Is it possible to make a quicksort run "well" in hardware? What are you going to do for the stack, and how big will you make it so that everything still works in the worst case.?
Yes, it is as possible to make it run as well in custom hardware as anywhere else.
You people have kept making the same arguments, and I have kept answering them. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
I have written about this several times now. This is what is going to happen in the U.S. It is as predictable as sunrise:
A "self-driven" vehicle will be in an accident. Maybe it kills a passenger, or somebody else. This might even happen several times. The hardware/software will be blamed. There will be big lawsuits.
The "self-driven vehicle" craze will die down for a while. People will say "I don't want to go near one of those things."
Eventually -- and it may take quite a while -- the technology will improve beyond question and they will be adopted again.
It's happened with just about every major advancement in automation to date. Why should cars be any different?
Hint: OP has links to the graphs that are being discussed here. I don't think they're "something very different". I was referring to the same references OP was.
And you can continue your tirade as long as you like: I still think that if YOU think PHP even vaguely "resembles" C, you are from a different world than the one I live in.
Slashdot Mirror
"Not jobs, just the facilities. We've got robots!"
Either way, it's still "production capacity" which is a boost for the local economy. While more jobs might be desirable, for the overall economy the production capacity is still a good thing.
When you use the term "piracy" improperly, you do the copyright trolls' work for them.
"I really dont have stomach for people who try to defend behavior thats about on the same level as shoplifting candy bars by saying "but no look Ubuntu is on demonoid too!""
I'm not trying to "defend" behavior. But on the other hand, I'm not trying to conflate non-criminal behavior with criminal behavior, as you are doing.
The FCC has the authority to designate a communications service either a common carrier or an information service. Reply to This Share
In the GENERAL case, yes. But Congress specifically exempted Internet businesses from Title II. It was one of the stupidest things Congress has ever done, and the decision was (of course) prompted by lobbyist money.
Can someone explain why they didn't just do this instead? Does this classification require legislation or something?
They didn't do this because Congress explicitly exempted Internet businesses from Common Carrier classification (known as Title II).
The FCC has several times since tried to classify ISPs as common carriers, but Congress (almost certainly due to lobbying) has refused to allow it.
I definitely agree. Classifying ISPs as Title II Common Carriers would eliminate a great many of today's ills. It would just take enough people to badger Congress (or alternatively, a Congress with the cojones to stand up to lobbyists) to do it.
"Omly the US had a fucked up volontary system for reporting due taxes."
That "fucked up volontary system" is due to the way our country is structured.
States cannot tax transactions that happen in other States. That's because each State is sovereign. So States impose a "use" tax (which actually is not "voluntary") on the use of the item within the State. Because it is not a tax on the transaction, and only involves inside-State use, it is a legal tax.
The Federal government, likewise, has no authority to tax on behalf of States.
That's the way our country is designed. That's the way it's supposed to be. If you don't like it, go somewhere else... don't try to mess up the government of my states and country by imposing what YOU think is a "fair" tax.
OK, it doesn't say in the article. Someone should elaborate on that "despair of the hardware companies".
Yes, and particularly this bit about "you can't do it in the United States." That seems a rather outrageous claim to me, especially now that many corporations are moving their manufacturing and production facilities back to the United States.
"The scope of that case was greatly lowered by a subsequent one:"
I disagree. That case was about inducement to infringe, not the legality of copying.
"Torrenting has legitimate use, but Demonoid was truly for pirating."
Nope. I happen to know that Demonoid carried legal content, because I personally used it for such.
And please get your terminology straight. Copying for personal use is NOT "piracy". Piracy is a legal term, and it involves copyright infringement for profit.
Don't care about it, look at it as a throw away fly by night service as Google WILL shit all over it trying to make it FB and when it don't make FB money? It'll be shitcanned
They did the shitting a long time ago. The difference is that instead of killing it, they decided to FORCE people to use it by consolidating all their other services around it.
That won't work, and it doesn't work. I quit using most of the services that require Google+ membership. I quit commenting on YouTube. Etc. Rather than be coerced, to the extent I reasonably can I'm just abandoning their platform, and I will go with alternatives instead.
Google thought they had us by the gonads. They were wrong. 'Bye, Google.
"Would you be willing to wager that legal activity was even more than 10%? Because I wouldnt."
In the U.S., it doesn't matter. IANAL, but legally speaking, the amount of illegal vs legal activity is irrelevant. It only has to have genuine legitimate uses to remain legal. Anything else would constitute punishing law-abiders for the actions of others.
See the Betamax decision.
"There are legitimate uses for torrents, but demonoid wasn't about distributing Linux iso's or other open source projects. It was about pirating movies and music."
Actually, no. If you wanted hit movies or music, Demonoid was among the last places you would look. It might have what you were looking for, but probably not.
Demonoid's forte was along the line of more obscure works, like hard-to-find books and such.
But the only way to do that legitimately is to rule out confounding factors... and in a case like this, there are so many potential confounding factors that it may well be a near-impossible task.
"Dell, Acer, and others announced 28" 4K monitors over the last week at CES, all right around $799. A little bit pricier than the Seiki, but they come with DisplayPort and are able to do 4K@60Hz, IIRC."
That's good. 39" at that resolution (as in OP) might be great for a TV, but it isn't for a monitor, at all. For good ergonomics, you'd have to sit too far away from it, which makes the extra size pretty much pointless.
"I am currently using 2-27" 2560x1440 with a 3rd 1080p that I watch TV and movies while I am working. I probably won't upgrade until HDMI 2.0 becomes commonplace."
Sounds like a nice setup.
"Four editors side-by-side each with over a hundred lines of code, and enough room to spare for a project navigator, console, and debugger. Enough room to visualize the back-end service code, the HTML template, the style-sheet, the client-side script, and the finished result in a web browser â" all at once without one press of Alt-tab."
Not even. When I'm programming, I currently use 2 monitors with total horizontal resolution of 3600 pixels... and I still have to switch windows A LOT.
2 of these would be sweet. But they're too large. If you put the same number of pixels in a 28" screen, two of them would be just about right.
Version 1 had no directional control. Version 3 does have a rudder, and I have seen videos of it flying around.
"If the above scenario takes place it will mean that other jurisdictions (Singapore, Korea, China, Taiwan) will end up as the chief source of expertise for these vehicles and end up with the largest portion of the profits."
Since when has this mattered in the past? In the U.S., some lawsuit-happy people have nearly always jumped in and ruined it for everybody else.
I did not say this was a desirable outcome. I simply stated it was a pretty predictable outcome, given other such issues in the past.
It happened in the very beginning with automobiles (vs. horses).
It happened with home-built (now called "experimental") aircraft.
It happened with antilock brakes.
It happened with computerized cars.
Given time, I could probably think of about 100 examples.
"The closest the real world approaches your definition is that no rational person knowingly produces a good which, at completion, will be valued less than the opportunity cost of its production and distribution. But people can be wrong, and goods which have already been produced are often worth less than their original cost."
But if you attempt to calculate value, you generally find that value will be approximately equal to cost of production plus distribution. This is true because of simple supply-and-demand. Unless the commodity in question is unusually rare, then if the value (its worth in trade for other commodities) much exceeds cost of production + distribution, more will be made and distributed, bringing the PRICE down. If, on the other hand, its worth in trade is much less than the cost of production + distribution, it will not be produced, bringing the PRICE back up because supply is reduced in proportion to demand.
It is easy to show this on a graph.
But the point I was getting at back in the beginning is this: when market PRICE is completely detached from VALUE, your market is irrational. When what a commodity is sold for is completely unrelated to any kind of actual value to society of that commodity (whether you want to go by that equation or some other measure of trade value), your market is subject to bubbles and other such potential disasters.
This is what I was referring to when I stated that market PRICE is not necessarily related to VALUE. When the price of something that is a classical scarce commodity like Bitcoin can fluctuate 50% in a single day, then your price is irrationally detached from value, and you should beware of investing.
"Perhaps according to Marx's long-discredited labor theory of value, but not according to any modern economic theory. The fact that you can easily spend a fortune making something that you have no use for and which no one else wants to buy (i.e., which has no value) should make that obvious."
Pick up just about any college textbook on Microeconomics 101. It will explain to you that "value" has a specific definition, and a specific meaning, and that isn't it.
Quit bringing your psuedo-Marxist economic theories into it. This is plain old capitalist college microeconomics. Try reading about it sometime.
"If you have to spend 3 million dollars on custom hardware development just to get performance parity with a COTS general purpose CPU... you'd be hard pressed to call that "well" by any measure."
Must I repeat this yet again? I was using "well" to mean it was possible to get it to run well on custom hardware. GP's comment may have had a different definition of "well". We know this, we acknowledged it a long time ago, and this is all just a rehash of what has gone before.
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not trying to be rude. But comes a point at which I tire of repeating myself.
If you're any good with a small soldering iron, you can take a micro-USB cable and a mini-USB cable, hook up a battery and a AWUS036NH 2W wifi adapter, and have wifi control 1/2 mile away from your cell phone. Maybe farther, depending on conditions. It's small, it's portable, and it' legal.
"If lots of people think you're using a term badly, then maybe, just maybe, you're at fault - did that ever cross your mind?"
And your definition of "well" means consuming X power and Y hardware?
I will repeat this for you one more time: *I* was the one who wrote above that there could be misunderstandings about the meaning of "well". You haven't been adding ANYTHING to the conversation.
"Both the value and the price are determined by buyers and sellers."
NO, they aren't! Pick up a book on economics. Value has a specific definition, and it is not the same as price! Value is, as I clearly stated earlier, cost of production + cost of distribution. That is its definition. Which, by the way, IS objective.
Value and price are economically DIFFERENT things. My apple example was just an attempt to put it in non-technical terms, for someone who obviously does not know economics.
Is it possible to make a quicksort run "well" in hardware? What are you going to do for the stack, and how big will you make it so that everything still works in the worst case.?
Yes, it is as possible to make it run as well in custom hardware as anywhere else.
You people have kept making the same arguments, and I have kept answering them. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
I have written about this several times now. This is what is going to happen in the U.S. It is as predictable as sunrise:
A "self-driven" vehicle will be in an accident. Maybe it kills a passenger, or somebody else. This might even happen several times. The hardware/software will be blamed. There will be big lawsuits.
The "self-driven vehicle" craze will die down for a while. People will say "I don't want to go near one of those things."
Eventually -- and it may take quite a while -- the technology will improve beyond question and they will be adopted again.
It's happened with just about every major advancement in automation to date. Why should cars be any different?
Hint: OP has links to the graphs that are being discussed here. I don't think they're "something very different". I was referring to the same references OP was.
And you can continue your tirade as long as you like: I still think that if YOU think PHP even vaguely "resembles" C, you are from a different world than the one I live in.