There is not much advantage to be taken. Software market in India is, like , 5 orders of magnitude smaller than the US and EU. Especially the part where most of the "innovation" is going on, where the innovation really gives a competitive advantage.
Ah yes, the good old proof by assumed authority. If you are not aware , low uid is the only authority recognized in slashdot. And anyway it doesn't cure the inaccurate language used in your statements. Anyway, enjoy your assumption of invincibility.
The one all of my family members and their stuff fits in.
They would fit in any larger car too. And more comfortably. And more friends and extended family would fit. Where you draw the line could well be affected by ads without your knowledge.
No. Why should I be, unless they have the same needs I do
Your language suggests you think one gets influenced deliberately. That could be the reason for your misconceptions.
How do you know what size car you need? Are you sure you are not influenced by celebrities driving particular sized cars? Advertisements / movie (or other videos you watch) placements of that size of cars ? Acquaintances talking about / using that size of cars, in turn influenced by advertisements?
Costco has directly influenced your decision by your own admission. And why costco, and why amazon? Is this not in some way influenced by advertisements? Ads directly working on you, or working on others and others "working" on you.
Let me get this straight. One forum (youtube), which no one can read currently anyway by your own admission. No dearth of other forums to discuss. To make that one forum more readable, for no specified purpose, is more important than keeping alive the possibility that internet be anonymous for some purposes? Even though there are other forums that are readable in spite of not having such restrictions?
Is this serious? If yes, I have no more to discuss. If no, I have so far completely misundersood your point.
Laws are made for the common, reasonable case. There will always be crazies. You can't design the law around crazies without unduly punishing normal, reasonable people.
exactly like the American laws enabling security theatre at airports. Laws , completely made for the common , reasonable case. Only common man would carry aerosol on a flight , no crazy would ever dream of that. Got it.
What about the poor supercomputer builder whose equipment supplier refuses to give a driver for kernels over 2.6? Linus should enforce regular updates by suing such suppliers under DMCA, of course after modifying the license.
Linux also has the same "problem" as android has : most users don't use latest version. For android you suggest restrictions by Google to be the solution, Linux also has the same option for a "solution" - restrictions by copyright holders can enforce regular updates.
In both cases, the freedom and open-source nature of (Linux/android) cause such solutions to be impossible. At the very least, it drastically reduces the free/Free/open source nature of (Linux/android) .
In both cases, freedom is more important to many of its users than using the latest version. Yet you are only sympathetic towards android users and not towards Linux users.
, it's not the same thing. Something not being allowed and something being illegal are not the same thing at all
Show me an analogy which is the exact "same thing" as the one it is an analogy of.
My points were valid, yours were not, but you don't really seem interested in actual discussion, just throwing out hyperbole in the guise of critiquing my argument.
Or you could simply look up what analogy means, and save the trouble of not understanding simple analogies.
I have tried to explain how freedom and restrictions don't go together but you would rather have a linux that updates every day rather than one which drives over 90% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. Thankfully, Linus doesn't listen to you.
Message from you , loud and clear - I don't understand open source and don't want to. But I'll nag about the variety it must of necessity cause.
you said something about google "not allowing" certain things. Illegal also achieves the same thing. . Being an analogy , it is not exact , just illustrates the point. But since you don't have a real point , it is in your interest to focus on the differences.
Not everyone who uses Android is savvy enough to understand that the should pick the Nexus
Not everyone who drives a car is savvy enough to understand that "the" should not pick the Ford, but go with Honda. Obviously selling a Ford should be illegal. Fools and their money should be made inseparable by law.
are delighted with their Android phone - but they all have things like the Galaxy S2 and S3,
In other words, in spite of selling a Ford not being illegal, Honda is still being sold. Free market has the solution in this case. Rejoice.
fact - the low adoption of updates due to deliberate feet dragging or outright abandonment to force new phone sales.
Right, and 99% of linux installations are less than kernel version 3.0, which came out years ago. The embedded ones (routers / TVs etc.) are mostly at a version released a decade ago.
maybe Google could try to do something about it.
And yes, Linus (and other copyright holders of linux kernel) could do something about it. License it to only network capable devices, likely to be online most of the time. In-kernel update module, license invalid if the module unloaded. Send DMCA notices to anyone distributing "illegal" linux kernel sources with the update module removed.
It would make an awesome free and Free kernel. All the washing machines and toasters would move to linux immediately. Oh wait, they won't, nobody cares.
As it is, they've killed the device even before it launched since they've priced it at a "premium" price that's three times higher than the competition and aimed it at a demographic that is not known for spending money on premium items.
They are (promising to) manufacturing it in the US. A country that is not known (any more) for manufacturing scalability. Even if they follow your advice, and get a 20% chance of a demand for millions per year of the product, what next?
In the lucky event of 20% likelihood, factories in the US cannot hire enough skilled personnel to manufacture these, along with the freedom to fire them when a competitor's product comes along which reduces the demand of Nexus Q to thousands from millions. If they then move the production to China, it counts as going back on the promise to manufacture in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
There is not much advantage to be taken. Software market in India is, like , 5 orders of magnitude smaller than the US and EU. Especially the part where most of the "innovation" is going on, where the innovation really gives a competitive advantage.
What ? The very basic assumption of RAID is wrong, and it is a minor problem ?
Disk spouting garbage is a hardware problem. RAID-Z does mitigate it. RAID doesn't, so I don't see a point of bringing that up here.
This is a case where traditional concepts of "layering" are WRONG.
I'm a little skeptical of mashing all of this into the file system level, but I'm not sure my fears are rational
Far more than performance, they are concerned with the "write hole". Raid is inherently risky because of this.
bullshit. If google disappears , searches on bing.com will return 404.
ducks
You're guessing wrong. All 3 counts. Epic fail.
Ah yes, the good old proof by assumed authority. If you are not aware , low uid is the only authority recognized in slashdot. And anyway it doesn't cure the inaccurate language used in your statements. Anyway, enjoy your assumption of invincibility.
The one all of my family members and their stuff fits in.
They would fit in any larger car too. And more comfortably. And more friends and extended family would fit. Where you draw the line could well be affected by ads without your knowledge.
No. Why should I be, unless they have the same needs I do
Your language suggests you think one gets influenced deliberately. That could be the reason for your misconceptions.
Don't worry, necessary legislation will be bought and paid for, in advance.
In addition to points raised by jpapon,
How do you know what size car you need? Are you sure you are not influenced by celebrities driving particular sized cars? Advertisements / movie (or other videos you watch) placements of that size of cars ? Acquaintances talking about / using that size of cars, in turn influenced by advertisements?
Costco has directly influenced your decision by your own admission. And why costco, and why amazon? Is this not in some way influenced by advertisements? Ads directly working on you, or working on others and others "working" on you.
" Even though there are other forums that are readable in spite of not having such restrictions?"
Where?!
Right here. Ohh, Good evening Mr. Circle Times Square. Or is that Mr. Circlet Imes Square? Whatever.
Any successful forum has moderation
This is not moderation. Moderation doesn't have the privacy implications being discussed, so what is the point of bringing it up here?
Let me get this straight. One forum (youtube), which no one can read currently anyway by your own admission. No dearth of other forums to discuss. To make that one forum more readable, for no specified purpose, is more important than keeping alive the possibility that internet be anonymous for some purposes? Even though there are other forums that are readable in spite of not having such restrictions?
Is this serious? If yes, I have no more to discuss. If no, I have so far completely misundersood your point.
it's about a useful forum. or not
it? What it?
So don't read youtube comments. wow that was simple !
Laws are made for the common, reasonable case. There will always be crazies. You can't design the law around crazies without unduly punishing normal, reasonable people.
exactly like the American laws enabling security theatre at airports. Laws , completely made for the common , reasonable case. Only common man would carry aerosol on a flight , no crazy would ever dream of that. Got it.
Ever heard of Xbox?
Roasted rice not that bad, though. As always, well-intentioned criticism goes too far.
Oops, submitted instead of previewing.
What about the poor supercomputer builder whose equipment supplier refuses to give a driver for kernels over 2.6? Linus should enforce regular updates by suing such suppliers under DMCA, of course after modifying the license.
Linux also has the same "problem" as android has : most users don't use latest version. For android you suggest restrictions by Google to be the solution, Linux also has the same option for a "solution" - restrictions by copyright holders can enforce regular updates.
In both cases, the freedom and open-source nature of (Linux/android) cause such solutions to be impossible. At the very least, it drastically reduces the free/Free/open source nature of (Linux/android) .
In both cases, freedom is more important to many of its users than using the latest version. Yet you are only sympathetic towards android users and not towards Linux users.
Explain what hyperbole is? You? Of course not. If you knew, you wouldn't call my statement hyperbole.
You are the one calling my argument hyperbole / non sequiturs without giving a reason, remember?
, it's not the same thing. Something not being allowed and something being illegal are not the same thing at all
Show me an analogy which is the exact "same thing" as the one it is an analogy of.
My points were valid, yours were not, but you don't really seem interested in actual discussion, just throwing out hyperbole in the guise of critiquing my argument.
Or you could simply look up what analogy means, and save the trouble of not understanding simple analogies.
I have tried to explain how freedom and restrictions don't go together but you would rather have a linux that updates every day rather than one which drives over 90% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. Thankfully, Linus doesn't listen to you.
Message from you , loud and clear - I don't understand open source and don't want to. But I'll nag about the variety it must of necessity cause.
you said something about google "not allowing" certain things. Illegal also achieves the same thing. . Being an analogy , it is not exact , just illustrates the point. But since you don't have a real point , it is in your interest to focus on the differences.
Not everyone who uses Android is savvy enough to understand that the should pick the Nexus
Not everyone who drives a car is savvy enough to understand that "the" should not pick the Ford, but go with Honda. Obviously selling a Ford should be illegal. Fools and their money should be made inseparable by law.
are delighted with their Android phone - but they all have things like the Galaxy S2 and S3,
In other words, in spite of selling a Ford not being illegal, Honda is still being sold. Free market has the solution in this case. Rejoice.
fact - the low adoption of updates due to deliberate feet dragging or outright abandonment to force new phone sales.
Right, and 99% of linux installations are less than kernel version 3.0, which came out years ago. The embedded ones (routers / TVs etc.) are mostly at a version released a decade ago.
maybe Google could try to do something about it.
And yes, Linus (and other copyright holders of linux kernel) could do something about it. License it to only network capable devices, likely to be online most of the time. In-kernel update module, license invalid if the module unloaded. Send DMCA notices to anyone distributing "illegal" linux kernel sources with the update module removed.
It would make an awesome free and Free kernel. All the washing machines and toasters would move to linux immediately. Oh wait, they won't, nobody cares.
As it is, they've killed the device even before it launched since they've priced it at a "premium" price that's three times higher than the competition and aimed it at a demographic that is not known for spending money on premium items.
They are (promising to) manufacturing it in the US. A country that is not known (any more) for manufacturing scalability. Even if they follow your advice, and get a 20% chance of a demand for millions per year of the product, what next?
In the lucky event of 20% likelihood, factories in the US cannot hire enough skilled personnel to manufacture these, along with the freedom to fire them when a competitor's product comes along which reduces the demand of Nexus Q to thousands from millions. If they then move the production to China, it counts as going back on the promise to manufacture in the US.