Thanks for your comment, Phisbut. You make a good point. Something to consider, however, is that at least some of the casual piracy is not lost sales, in that some people might pirate Photoshop, but would never buy it/could not afford it. That isn't a lost sale for Adobe, but it is an increased user base, so you could argue that at least some "casual piracy" is beneficial to Adobe.
If I were a hard-ass (which my wife accuses me of quite often) I would say that you can't fight the market this way. As much as you feel entitled to $X per copy, at least some people do not, and we need to find ways to be profitable accepting this fact. How? Dunno. But whoever solves that problem will be rich like a Nazi!
As to your personal situation, I of course wish you nothing but success.
God dammit I wish I could mod you a +6. Thanks for that great post. It should be required reading. "You cannot log in until you read all +6 posts."...or something.
You make a good point that a lot of people miss. We are quite content to pay for things that we perceive as having value. We do it all day, everyday. The problem with digital media is that a lot of people do not think they are getting a fair deal anymore, hence the rise in "casual piracy".
Art existed before media companies and it will exist after media companies. Art isn't dying, only the current business model is.
If this is the case, then I wonder if this isn't a rather risky move for MS, especially considering their history of lawsuits for anti-competitive practices.
I would think it isn't risky at all, considering the effect those lawsuits have had on Microsoft's monopoly.:(
Wow. I believe you now. I'm horrified that the ability to turn off your computer with an accidental key-stroke could be listed as a feature. Unbelievable!
Surely that image has been edited in some way. The keys in question look far too large, and then there's the dotted red lines around them with a line leading off image. I think you may be confused. Or we need a better picture!
Agreed. But it's not the profit that's the problem. There must be profit for someone (and the more that profit, the better) or it just won't work. It's the way you make profit from a public health care system that's the problem. Patients are not encouraged to use the services only when necessary, and providers are not constantly seeking to offer what best fits what the public wants at the lowest possible cost.
But that's a debate for another day/thread. Peace out.
I apologize for my colleague Michael's senseless attempt to use interesting words and ideas when perfectly dreary ones would have worked as well.
Allow me to translate what he said for you.
"I am currently unclear as to now an unknown search program could generate 1.2 billion dollars in value, and am interested in hearing opinions on the matter."
I realize I'm massively OT, but either you're being ironic and pointing out the main reason why public healthcare will ultimately fail, or you are grossly misinformed. If doctor's weren't paid to "doctor", why would they? Would you do your job if you weren't paid? "Take profit out of health care" sounds nice, but it's not actually possible.
In my opinion this is worse than the "communities" some e-com sites have you join that secretly charge your card $2 a month, at least that you see on your CC statement.
Those "communities", my friend, are called "porn websites"
Dude! Where are you getting pr0n for $2 a month? Sign me up!
Thanks for posting that. As I read the Catharsis post it was rumbling around in my head that the idea of catharsis was bunk but I couldn't remember where I heard that.
I quit my SDE position at Microsoft and joined one of their competitors. Any other questions?
Actually, no. You had the courage to do what you thought was right, and that carries a lot of weight with me. The Geek Liberation Army needs people like you. Hopefully we'll meet on the other side.
Microsoft is clearly very much threatened, and already fighting. Or hadn't you noticed the SCO lawsuit and the patent infringement hand-waving?
You call that fighting? Holy Crap! No. What they have done so far is trade some internal emails and write a few cheques. You will know MS feels threatened when they drop all their money loseing ventures like the Zune and cut the price of Office in half at retail and offer it for pennies to big business. THAT is MS threatened.
How, by users switching to Windows and Office, or by Microsoft entering and dominating new markets?
Got it in one. Except your attempt at sarcasm really just reveals exactly how naked the FOSS Emperor is. The Windows market is untroubled (and growing in profits). Vista will be dominant in a few years. They ARE entering new markets and WILL dominate them because they can afford to waste millions for a few years until they get it right. The Zune is a great example. It will rule...eventually. Read the saga of the X-box (which no one thought could ever touch the Playstation) for a reminder of some history that is going to repeat itself.
Clearly packages like Samba and OpenOffice are of critical importance, but don't underestimate the contributions of Apple and Google in eventually handing Microsoft its ass on a platter.
Sigh. All MS has to do is throw a switch and all your precious projects will be relegated to obscurity. Over 90% of the world uses Windows. One or two well-timed "updates" could wreak so much havoc on the world that everyone would be terrified to use anything NOT MS. They have the power. They have boat-loads of money. They aren't even thinking about starting to maybe sweat over the threat of FOSS. If they wanted to, they could crucify any project. They could sue it in to oblivion or just get the fucking laws changed.
Then start coding...
I did. I started to learn earlier this year, at age 33, because I want change. Being a musician, I am taking on the music industry first, but I will help end the MS monopoly. What are you doing about it?
FOSS software, despite the best hallucinations of the slashdot crowd, isn't making a dent in MS where it counts: the Bottom Line. We need to wake up, people! We are not doing enough to break this monopoly. And it will have to be the geeks that do it, because the government won't. I realize I'm ranting, but I just get so frustrated by this smug sense of inevitability that is so often on display here. Do you think MS will go down without a fight? Do you think that a company with almost limitless cash is going to be threatened by anything less than all-out war from the FOSS community?
Here are the facts:
- No one is going to do anything about MS's monopoly.
- The monopoly will get worse.
- The only people who have a chance to break it are the geeks.
- Even then it would take a united effort from all of us.
-...however we've got our heads jammed so far up our own asses that all we can do is argue about who's license is more free.
I defy anyone to disprove any of my facts. Go ahead and mod me down. MS wins again.
Ah, but maybe like all great poker players they are actually only telling you what cards they want you to think they have. Also, I imagine that, should they be out-bid by a penny, they will find some more money somewhere.
Re:I'd say it depends on who you ask...
on
Is SETI Worth It?
·
· Score: 1
True enough. I didn't explain what I meant very well. I meant that I find it unlikely that if humans did come back in time and tamper with the course of history, they would have, at some point, left their garbage behind or a science book or a fancy gun or something. I don't think humans have it in them to go back in time, change the course of history and not...gloat.:)
Re:I'd say it depends on who you ask...
on
Is SETI Worth It?
·
· Score: 1
Your mention of a time-machine reminded me of an epiphone I had last weekend.
I postulate that time travel is either impossible to attempt or that while time travelling it is impossible to participate (meaning you can't change anything or even be noticed by anyone). Why? Because no one has come back and screwed things up or let it slip somehow! Does anyone really think humans could, if they had time travel, always resist the urge to go back and meddle? I don't.
I think one of the failings of our modern society is that we have determined that God doesn't exist and that we got here through natural selection, but we have not provided a meaningful framework for people to live their lives by. Like it or not, religion provided civilisation with direction and guidance. In fact, you could argue that the most succesful religions were the ones that best described a beneficial social system. However, now that the church has been struck down, where do we go to learn how to act? Where does this man learn that taking natural selection in to his own hands is not necessarily a good idea?
IMO, it is not the _interface_ that is cool about Time Machine, but the ease of use and the fact that it is fully automatic.
I didn't RTFA, so I don't know if this "Time Machine for Linux" implementation is as easy to use or not, but the real thing that makes Time Machine cool is that even my mother can use it.
So it is the interface, then?
I realize the interface doesn't do the heavy lifting in an application, but I wish the FLOSS crowd would finally clue in to the fact that ease-of-use matters. For example, GnuPG is a way to protect your privacy through encryption, but it only has a CLI. GUIs exist for GnuPG, but their installation is complex. Why do people work on GnuPG? Because privacy is important! But who gives a fuck when only 1% of the population can use it? Thanks for nothing, GnuPG!
I have no particular bee in my bonnet about GnuPG, it was just the latest FLOSS effort to piss me off. Open-Source software and "Free as in Freedom" are ideas too important to be relegated to the technical elite, but the technical elite's refusal to make their tools easy enough for the rest of us cuts out most of society. You have the cure for cancer but refuse to give it to us because we don't have the time or desire to learn Perl.
This Linux "Time Machine" sounds cool. Too bad I'll never be able to use it. Bah!
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for your comment, Phisbut. You make a good point. Something to consider, however, is that at least some of the casual piracy is not lost sales, in that some people might pirate Photoshop, but would never buy it/could not afford it. That isn't a lost sale for Adobe, but it is an increased user base, so you could argue that at least some "casual piracy" is beneficial to Adobe.
If I were a hard-ass (which my wife accuses me of quite often) I would say that you can't fight the market this way. As much as you feel entitled to $X per copy, at least some people do not, and we need to find ways to be profitable accepting this fact. How? Dunno. But whoever solves that problem will be rich like a Nazi!
As to your personal situation, I of course wish you nothing but success.
God dammit I wish I could mod you a +6. Thanks for that great post. It should be required reading. "You cannot log in until you read all +6 posts." ...or something.
You make a good point that a lot of people miss. We are quite content to pay for things that we perceive as having value. We do it all day, everyday. The problem with digital media is that a lot of people do not think they are getting a fair deal anymore, hence the rise in "casual piracy".
Art existed before media companies and it will exist after media companies. Art isn't dying, only the current business model is.
Wow. That is one mangled metaphor!
I would think it isn't risky at all, considering the effect those lawsuits have had on Microsoft's monopoly.
Wow. I believe you now. I'm horrified that the ability to turn off your computer with an accidental key-stroke could be listed as a feature. Unbelievable!
Is that you, Yoda?
Surely that image has been edited in some way. The keys in question look far too large, and then there's the dotted red lines around them with a line leading off image. I think you may be confused. Or we need a better picture!
Agreed. But it's not the profit that's the problem. There must be profit for someone (and the more that profit, the better) or it just won't work. It's the way you make profit from a public health care system that's the problem. Patients are not encouraged to use the services only when necessary, and providers are not constantly seeking to offer what best fits what the public wants at the lowest possible cost.
But that's a debate for another day/thread. Peace out.
Dear Mr. No-Sense-Of-Humour,
I apologize for my colleague Michael's senseless attempt to use interesting words and ideas when perfectly dreary ones would have worked as well.
Allow me to translate what he said for you.
"I am currently unclear as to now an unknown search program could generate 1.2 billion dollars in value, and am interested in hearing opinions on the matter."
Happy?
Sincerely,
robot_love
I realize I'm massively OT, but either you're being ironic and pointing out the main reason why public healthcare will ultimately fail, or you are grossly misinformed. If doctor's weren't paid to "doctor", why would they? Would you do your job if you weren't paid? "Take profit out of health care" sounds nice, but it's not actually possible.
Dude! Where are you getting pr0n for $2 a month? Sign me up!
Thanks for posting that. As I read the Catharsis post it was rumbling around in my head that the idea of catharsis was bunk but I couldn't remember where I heard that.
Sure, you got it. Good job.
Actually, no. You had the courage to do what you thought was right, and that carries a lot of weight with me. The Geek Liberation Army needs people like you. Hopefully we'll meet on the other side.
You call that fighting? Holy Crap! No. What they have done so far is trade some internal emails and write a few cheques. You will know MS feels threatened when they drop all their money loseing ventures like the Zune and cut the price of Office in half at retail and offer it for pennies to big business. THAT is MS threatened.
Got it in one. Except your attempt at sarcasm really just reveals exactly how naked the FOSS Emperor is. The Windows market is untroubled (and growing in profits). Vista will be dominant in a few years. They ARE entering new markets and WILL dominate them because they can afford to waste millions for a few years until they get it right. The Zune is a great example. It will rule...eventually. Read the saga of the X-box (which no one thought could ever touch the Playstation) for a reminder of some history that is going to repeat itself.
Sigh. All MS has to do is throw a switch and all your precious projects will be relegated to obscurity. Over 90% of the world uses Windows. One or two well-timed "updates" could wreak so much havoc on the world that everyone would be terrified to use anything NOT MS. They have the power. They have boat-loads of money. They aren't even thinking about starting to maybe sweat over the threat of FOSS. If they wanted to, they could crucify any project. They could sue it in to oblivion or just get the fucking laws changed.
I did. I started to learn earlier this year, at age 33, because I want change. Being a musician, I am taking on the music industry first, but I will help end the MS monopoly. What are you doing about it?
Thanks for the dose of reality, westlake.
...however we've got our heads jammed so far up our own asses that all we can do is argue about who's license is more free.
FOSS software, despite the best hallucinations of the slashdot crowd, isn't making a dent in MS where it counts: the Bottom Line. We need to wake up, people! We are not doing enough to break this monopoly. And it will have to be the geeks that do it, because the government won't. I realize I'm ranting, but I just get so frustrated by this smug sense of inevitability that is so often on display here. Do you think MS will go down without a fight? Do you think that a company with almost limitless cash is going to be threatened by anything less than all-out war from the FOSS community?
Here are the facts:
- No one is going to do anything about MS's monopoly.
- The monopoly will get worse.
- The only people who have a chance to break it are the geeks.
- Even then it would take a united effort from all of us.
-
I defy anyone to disprove any of my facts. Go ahead and mod me down. MS wins again.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of abacuses running Linux!
They seem to lack content, IMHO.
I think the problem is that they screen the albums. Why not put a rating system in there and let the user decide?
Ah, but maybe like all great poker players they are actually only telling you what cards they want you to think they have. Also, I imagine that, should they be out-bid by a penny, they will find some more money somewhere.
True enough. I didn't explain what I meant very well. I meant that I find it unlikely that if humans did come back in time and tamper with the course of history, they would have, at some point, left their garbage behind or a science book or a fancy gun or something. I don't think humans have it in them to go back in time, change the course of history and not...gloat. :)
Your mention of a time-machine reminded me of an epiphone I had last weekend.
I postulate that time travel is either impossible to attempt or that while time travelling it is impossible to participate (meaning you can't change anything or even be noticed by anyone). Why? Because no one has come back and screwed things up or let it slip somehow! Does anyone really think humans could, if they had time travel, always resist the urge to go back and meddle? I don't.
Cheers.
If I had a mod point, I'd mod you up.
I hate child porn fully and completely, but it's not more important than our freedom. Thanks for putting it context.
I think one of the failings of our modern society is that we have determined that God doesn't exist and that we got here through natural selection, but we have not provided a meaningful framework for people to live their lives by. Like it or not, religion provided civilisation with direction and guidance. In fact, you could argue that the most succesful religions were the ones that best described a beneficial social system. However, now that the church has been struck down, where do we go to learn how to act? Where does this man learn that taking natural selection in to his own hands is not necessarily a good idea?
So it is the interface, then?
I realize the interface doesn't do the heavy lifting in an application, but I wish the FLOSS crowd would finally clue in to the fact that ease-of-use matters. For example, GnuPG is a way to protect your privacy through encryption, but it only has a CLI. GUIs exist for GnuPG, but their installation is complex. Why do people work on GnuPG? Because privacy is important! But who gives a fuck when only 1% of the population can use it? Thanks for nothing, GnuPG!
I have no particular bee in my bonnet about GnuPG, it was just the latest FLOSS effort to piss me off. Open-Source software and "Free as in Freedom" are ideas too important to be relegated to the technical elite, but the technical elite's refusal to make their tools easy enough for the rest of us cuts out most of society. You have the cure for cancer but refuse to give it to us because we don't have the time or desire to learn Perl.
This Linux "Time Machine" sounds cool. Too bad I'll never be able to use it. Bah!