Except for the part where there exists software you don't have a right to run?
What software would be that be?
Originally I said that I would replace iOS on the iPad 3 with Android. How is that not allowed by the Android Open Source license?
Keep in mind that copyright does not stop me from modifying existing software that was licensed during a purchase. It would be a derivative work, but copyright only controls the distribution of those modifications, not the creation.
If I paid for the device, ethically, I have the right to use what ever software I want on it.
also, this is silly on its face. ethically or not, you only have the right to use a small subset of software on your toy. only a portion of software is written for a particular device! ethically, if you want to play temple run on your and-crap, to f'n bad! because they don't make it for your and-crap.
Well the law would seem to agree with my premise, along with the concept of ownership going back thousands of years.
If I own the hardware I have the absolute right to run any software on it I want. I paid the for the hardware. It became mine. If you want to dispute that premise, then you need to explain how after the sale they still enjoy rights of ownership. Can you explain that?
Something similar has been argued before and lost. That was the right to install after market parts on your car from different manufacturers in the US. The car manufacturers lost. This situation is no different. Manufacturers cannot enjoy rights of ownership when a sale is performed. Period.
While this might be accepted by the consumer because they lack the sophistication to understand what is happening, businesses do not. You can't sell that way to businesses because they see it as a liability. Specifically the manufacturer trying to control the device. Court cases have been lost before over it. It just won't work on businesses.
The solution is not to sell to businesses. This is why when a manufacturer wants to retain control in a business environment they lease. You can't own a Pitney Bowes postage machine. Some security devices you cannot own either.
Your argument is silly on its face. First you say that ethics are not a consideration. Ignoring that whopping egregious error in judgement, you have the rights to use all the software on your device the way you see fit. Where limitations come into play is when you wish to distribute your changes directly, via copyright laws. Which is why the DMCA is used so often to prevent such acts.
Secondly, all of the software was written for the device. If it was not, it would not be there. Kind of like trying to run a Windows binary on Linux natively.
Thirdly, you own the hardware out right. Typically, there is going to be several pieces of hardware inside that have firmware written by a 3rd party company. You have the rights to use that firmware to carry out the intended function of the hardware, or write your own.
Which brings us to the last point, you always retain the right to run whatever software you want on the hardware. Dell cannot force you, in any way, to run a specific set of software on your hardware. You get to choose. Apple hardware is no different, ethically, or legally. I can replace the software in any way I want, and even modify it to suit my needs. I just have to contend with copyright restrictions that don't allow me to distribute those changes in a nice neat package. However, I can tell people how to do it legally (and ethically).
BTW: You clearly refer to Android in the derogatory sense, but it is worth noting that it is open source. That means I can compile it and install on it hardware that is compatible.
Having principles, believing in actual ownership and free computing instead of walled gardens, is not being on a high horse.
Apple is abhorrent because they make computers. You would think they would have all sorts of employees working there, all the way up to the late Jobs, that believed that computing should be a free experience. Not to limit the end user, not to create walled gardens, but to create a platform that can be free.
It's funny that I get accused for being "on a high horse" about it when all I champion is freedom, privacy, and anonymity. Yeah... that's terrible.
How many? Enough to cover everywhere at the same time?
My concern is that a private corporation might mass produce drones to take pictures and identify objects and build a huge search engine for it. Or perhaps just add the data to a massive database they have already.
Government could just access that as well as a ton of other people that don't really have your best interests at heart.
Apple there is only one manufacturer. So purchasing hardware from them, however tempting, only enables their abhorrent behavior.
With Android there are quite a few manufacturers. I can financially reward the manufacturer that puts up the least road blocks to rooting the machine, or installing custom firmware/roms. HTC, for instance, is supportive by having unlocked bootloaders on current and future devices. There is at least a few devices that have unlocked bootloaders and I would rather reward them financially than Apple.
I believe in complete ownership of a device as an important principle that should be taken seriously and not compromised. If I paid for the device, ethically, I have the right to use what ever software I want on it.
Have actual ownership of my device that I paid for? Sounds crazy I know....
Have actually written anything for linux let alone Android? When I say "write", I'm not talking about downloading the source from some project SVN repo and doing a compile but rather writing something yourself.
All the time. It's my day job. Have not released anything as an open source project, but I am modest and most of my work is "work for hire" so I don't have that option. I have also modified quite a few open source projects to tweak it, or fix a bug that I did not feel like waiting for the developers to get around to taking care of.
I have not yet written anything for the Android platform specifically. Quite frankly I don't have as much time as I would like for personal projects.
You can also write something yourself with a mac and and a developer account. The advantage with iOS is that you actually have a chance to earn back your money and possibly make a decent living without selling your soul to advertisers.
With Apple I only have one choice. Apple. If I want their hardware I must accept their terms, drink the Koolaid, enter the walled garden, and become one the Shiny Happy People.
Blackberry is not an alternative anymore. Sad, the Playbook was pretty decent hardware and looked great. That platform is dead.
WebOS is on its death bed with constant rumors of it resurfacing in another company like a cancelled sitcom on another channel.
Android at least has more than one manufacturer. All it takes is one to offer a device that is, more or less, trivial to root. Android will allow me to not be part of a walled garden and I can do what ever I want. That includes be stupid and get malware installed, but at least I get to have actual ownership and responsibility over my device.
I don't pull punches about Apple. Their corporate culture and ideology is abhorrent. However, I will give respect where respect is due. They make some damn fine hardware that looks good. I really do want an iPad 3. Just not the walled garden.
Although I could jail break (I spelled it right this time Kell!) Apple hardware, I would still need to pay for it. The looks and the specs on the iPad 3 make it damn tempting to do so.
Yeah, the part about dangers of ammonium hydroxide is hilarious - reminds me of the most dangerous chemical dihydrogen monoxide and its abuse by evil corporations.
I know right? At least I hear that if you drink enough water you can flush the dihydrogen monoxide out of your system.
All that fancy chemical talk was beyond me. I just looked at that picture. "select lean beef trimmings"? I would say select my ass, but they would probably include it.
That was the nastiest thing I ever seen. It does not belong in a hamburger. At all. Period.
I am a firm believer that you cannot eat every part of the animal. If you want to eat the lips, eyes, and buttholes, more power to you. I just want that "crap" labeled.
Seriously. Who could look at that picture and say, "Ummmmmm.... yeah. I want that spread all over my hamburger and cooked into it. Tasty"?
outsourced cleaners with poor English don't know any better and a good story is all it takes to get past them.
Being a janitor does not mean you can use social engineering to get past them. Even with a good story. It depends on the janitors.
I have used social engineering to get past people that can speak the English real good, get paid many times more than a janitor, and have college degrees.
Social engineering works on people that are not always considering security around them, and to a large extent, those that are not cynical and suspicious of others by nature. It's much harder to get past assholes with the best stories and a lot easier to get past a cute secretary that is outgoing and bubbly.
You get a 60 year old janitor who has seen it all and heard it all, and believes there are aliens at Area 51, and you have somebody with a finely tuned bullshit detector. Those are the equivalent of landmines in social engineering.
The point of frac'ing is to fracture the lower rock formation, there is no casing on the fractured rock, and it can fracture upwards to the point where a water path can form.
Not with the type of fraccing I am talking about and have experienced. There is so much rock above the formation that it is effectively a "casing" and there is no point a water path can form.
Yes, if the casing fails, you can have water table contamination. I am assuming some competency and accountability on the part the operator here.
The exact structure of the ground can be very hard to predict, and therefore is generally averaged.
There is no prediction. This is precisely what 3D seismic is for. It images the ground just like a doctor would image your heart with sound waves. Costs a lot of money but it can tell with you a fair degree of certainty what the structure of the ground is like. That's how you make educated guesses on what formations you want to frac in the first place. You can't do the whole thing, so you need to make educated choices where you want to do it.
However, all that being said, from what other posters are saying and citing in articles, the fraccing I have been exposed to is nothing like the fraccing that is actually going on. Which is partly what I have been saying. That whatever is happening is not so much fraccing related, as it is just reckless engineering and greed.
At this point I am convinced we are not talking about the same process. It has the same name, but is otherwise very different.
The article laid out a process that was flat out nuts and irresponsible. None of the wells I was at were anything like what you are describing. I have a feeling those engineers would not be a part of something that reckless either.
I believe what you are saying and it does not have anything to do with my experiences or understanding of the technology. It's amazing that these are deep wells and you can feel something that far away with sustained seismic activity afterwards. It must be continuous over time, which is not my experience at all. Not to mention much more powerful, which is again amazing, because the fracs I was at were considered within the top 5% of "powerful" fracs. You seem to indicate something at least an order higher in intensity.
There is no way I would support the type of processes you are experiencing where you live and whatever I posted does not seem to apply to your situation.
The amount of energy released is enough to cause vibration that can be felt on the surface in many areas, sometimes even several miles away.
Not true. At least not with the ones I was witness to which were considered quite large. While I did feel vibrations on the surface, you could not feel them miles away. Not really. You had to being paying attention.
From what that article describes it is not the fraccing that is causing the sustained geological activity, but that craziness of pumping and leaving that much fluid in the ground. I can believe that can cause small quakes over time dependent on just how much you are doing.
No different than geothermal. That has been shown to cause increased seismic activity as well. That I would have expected since you are talking about extracting large amounts of energy.
I read that article and it does not have anything to do with the type of fraccing I have encountered.
That stuff is crazy. The ones I was witness to were anything but shallow, but at 15k feet instead. There was certainly not millions of gallons of fluid. Everything had to be trucked in.
Initially, all the fluid was reclaimed and trucked off site for disposal. That was not pumped back down into the ground to my knowledge at all. Any fluid remaining was extracted over time to a container on the site. I remember that for a few years a truck had to come by every so often to empty it. What I witnessed had practically no impact on the local environment at all. No ponds, fluids, etc. Just a well bore, casing, and a pipeline to take the natural gas to the refinery. That's it.
That article describes a completely different fraccing process. Not to mention none of these walls were horizontal, but vertical. Straight down to 15-20k feet deep.
I will fully admit that what that article talks about seems completely reckless and irresponsible.
I was not aware that chicks were all into basements. Maybe when they are 14 and literally have no other place to go and the guy is a jock, but past the time you can have a drivers license? Not so much.
They would only have it done in less time because chicks have this amazing ability to, dependent upon their hotness, to amass armies of men to do their bidding.
You get a half dozen hot chicks in thongs with some beer, and you could easily get two to three times that many men digging a basement for them on the weekend.
Can you say the same for amassing any army of women to do a man's bidding? That is so rare, it is only spoken of in fairy tales, and not actually believed to be true.
It was just an elaborate excuse to convince his wife to let him spend that much time on money on RC toys. In other words, it was a hobby.
Sounds like a pretty fun one too. He can build a man cave down there and showcase the RC toys and be able to tell visitors he created the whole thing with those toys.
Slashdot Mirror
Except for the part where there exists software you don't have a right to run?
What software would be that be?
Originally I said that I would replace iOS on the iPad 3 with Android. How is that not allowed by the Android Open Source license?
Keep in mind that copyright does not stop me from modifying existing software that was licensed during a purchase. It would be a derivative work, but copyright only controls the distribution of those modifications, not the creation.
I have never disagreed with your observation.
A license to run Android on any hardware I want is readily available.
Another reason why everything I run on every single server I operate (with a few exceptions for some clients) is open source.
If I paid for the device, ethically, I have the right to use what ever software I want on it.
also, this is silly on its face. ethically or not, you only have the right to use a small subset of software on your toy. only a portion of software is written for a particular device! ethically, if you want to play temple run on your and-crap, to f'n bad! because they don't make it for your and-crap.
Well the law would seem to agree with my premise, along with the concept of ownership going back thousands of years.
If I own the hardware I have the absolute right to run any software on it I want. I paid the for the hardware. It became mine. If you want to dispute that premise, then you need to explain how after the sale they still enjoy rights of ownership. Can you explain that?
Something similar has been argued before and lost. That was the right to install after market parts on your car from different manufacturers in the US. The car manufacturers lost. This situation is no different. Manufacturers cannot enjoy rights of ownership when a sale is performed. Period.
While this might be accepted by the consumer because they lack the sophistication to understand what is happening, businesses do not. You can't sell that way to businesses because they see it as a liability. Specifically the manufacturer trying to control the device. Court cases have been lost before over it. It just won't work on businesses.
The solution is not to sell to businesses. This is why when a manufacturer wants to retain control in a business environment they lease. You can't own a Pitney Bowes postage machine. Some security devices you cannot own either.
Your argument is silly on its face. First you say that ethics are not a consideration. Ignoring that whopping egregious error in judgement, you have the rights to use all the software on your device the way you see fit. Where limitations come into play is when you wish to distribute your changes directly, via copyright laws. Which is why the DMCA is used so often to prevent such acts.
Secondly, all of the software was written for the device. If it was not, it would not be there. Kind of like trying to run a Windows binary on Linux natively.
Thirdly, you own the hardware out right. Typically, there is going to be several pieces of hardware inside that have firmware written by a 3rd party company. You have the rights to use that firmware to carry out the intended function of the hardware, or write your own.
Which brings us to the last point, you always retain the right to run whatever software you want on the hardware. Dell cannot force you, in any way, to run a specific set of software on your hardware. You get to choose. Apple hardware is no different, ethically, or legally. I can replace the software in any way I want, and even modify it to suit my needs. I just have to contend with copyright restrictions that don't allow me to distribute those changes in a nice neat package. However, I can tell people how to do it legally (and ethically).
BTW: You clearly refer to Android in the derogatory sense, but it is worth noting that it is open source. That means I can compile it and install on it hardware that is compatible.
Having principles, believing in actual ownership and free computing instead of walled gardens, is not being on a high horse.
Apple is abhorrent because they make computers. You would think they would have all sorts of employees working there, all the way up to the late Jobs, that believed that computing should be a free experience. Not to limit the end user, not to create walled gardens, but to create a platform that can be free.
It's funny that I get accused for being "on a high horse" about it when all I champion is freedom, privacy, and anonymity. Yeah... that's terrible.
How many? Enough to cover everywhere at the same time?
My concern is that a private corporation might mass produce drones to take pictures and identify objects and build a huge search engine for it. Or perhaps just add the data to a massive database they have already.
Government could just access that as well as a ton of other people that don't really have your best interests at heart.
Apple there is only one manufacturer. So purchasing hardware from them, however tempting, only enables their abhorrent behavior.
With Android there are quite a few manufacturers. I can financially reward the manufacturer that puts up the least road blocks to rooting the machine, or installing custom firmware/roms. HTC, for instance, is supportive by having unlocked bootloaders on current and future devices. There is at least a few devices that have unlocked bootloaders and I would rather reward them financially than Apple.
I believe in complete ownership of a device as an important principle that should be taken seriously and not compromised. If I paid for the device, ethically, I have the right to use what ever software I want on it.
I'm sorry. I don't have any more food for the troll. Not even such a cute little one like you..... so cheeky too
You called me out. Well Played.
Principles are just *so* highly over rated. Giving in and just buying the device is the easier path and I should just take that.
Freedom to do what exactly?
Have actual ownership of my device that I paid for? Sounds crazy I know....
Have actually written anything for linux let alone Android? When I say "write", I'm not talking about downloading the source from some project SVN repo and doing a compile but rather writing something yourself.
All the time. It's my day job. Have not released anything as an open source project, but I am modest and most of my work is "work for hire" so I don't have that option. I have also modified quite a few open source projects to tweak it, or fix a bug that I did not feel like waiting for the developers to get around to taking care of.
I have not yet written anything for the Android platform specifically. Quite frankly I don't have as much time as I would like for personal projects.
You can also write something yourself with a mac and and a developer account. The advantage with iOS is that you actually have a chance to earn back your money and possibly make a decent living without selling your soul to advertisers.
With Apple I only have one choice. Apple. If I want their hardware I must accept their terms, drink the Koolaid, enter the walled garden, and become one the Shiny Happy People.
Blackberry is not an alternative anymore. Sad, the Playbook was pretty decent hardware and looked great. That platform is dead.
WebOS is on its death bed with constant rumors of it resurfacing in another company like a cancelled sitcom on another channel.
Android at least has more than one manufacturer. All it takes is one to offer a device that is, more or less, trivial to root. Android will allow me to not be part of a walled garden and I can do what ever I want. That includes be stupid and get malware installed, but at least I get to have actual ownership and responsibility over my device.
I don't pull punches about Apple. Their corporate culture and ideology is abhorrent. However, I will give respect where respect is due. They make some damn fine hardware that looks good. I really do want an iPad 3. Just not the walled garden.
Although I could jail break (I spelled it right this time Kell!) Apple hardware, I would still need to pay for it. The looks and the specs on the iPad 3 make it damn tempting to do so.
Spell check and sarcastic Spelling Nazis :)
Good times.
True...True.... but what about those round shiny corners? So shiny....
It looks really nice, but I just can't bring myself to drink the Koolaid and walk into the walled garden. I like a little more freedom in my devices.
Now if you could jail brake it and install Android 4.0 I might consider it for the specs. I have to hand to Apple, they do look damn good.
Yeah, the part about dangers of ammonium hydroxide is hilarious - reminds me of the most dangerous chemical dihydrogen monoxide and its abuse by evil corporations.
I know right? At least I hear that if you drink enough water you can flush the dihydrogen monoxide out of your system.
All that fancy chemical talk was beyond me. I just looked at that picture. "select lean beef trimmings"? I would say select my ass, but they would probably include it.
That was the nastiest thing I ever seen. It does not belong in a hamburger. At all. Period.
I am a firm believer that you cannot eat every part of the animal. If you want to eat the lips, eyes, and buttholes, more power to you. I just want that "crap" labeled.
Seriously. Who could look at that picture and say, "Ummmmmm.... yeah. I want that spread all over my hamburger and cooked into it. Tasty"?
It's woooshhh in the English right?
outsourced cleaners with poor English don't know any better and a good story is all it takes to get past them.
Being a janitor does not mean you can use social engineering to get past them. Even with a good story. It depends on the janitors.
I have used social engineering to get past people that can speak the English real good, get paid many times more than a janitor, and have college degrees.
Social engineering works on people that are not always considering security around them, and to a large extent, those that are not cynical and suspicious of others by nature. It's much harder to get past assholes with the best stories and a lot easier to get past a cute secretary that is outgoing and bubbly.
You get a 60 year old janitor who has seen it all and heard it all, and believes there are aliens at Area 51, and you have somebody with a finely tuned bullshit detector. Those are the equivalent of landmines in social engineering.
But our marketing blast algorithm is programmed to have feelings and care deeply about you
Now that was creepy. I feel like you are going to offer me some cake now.
Just as a warning to other people, don't click the link.
I stopped eating McDonald's and all that other processed crap years ago, but that article is so shocking I almost blew chunks at the monitor.
I deeply, deeply, deeply regret ever eating anything at McDonald's in my entire life now.
You are assuming there is a brain?
This is more like a parasite.
The point of frac'ing is to fracture the lower rock formation, there is no casing on the fractured rock, and it can fracture upwards to the point where a water path can form.
Not with the type of fraccing I am talking about and have experienced. There is so much rock above the formation that it is effectively a "casing" and there is no point a water path can form.
Yes, if the casing fails, you can have water table contamination. I am assuming some competency and accountability on the part the operator here.
The exact structure of the ground can be very hard to predict, and therefore is generally averaged.
There is no prediction. This is precisely what 3D seismic is for. It images the ground just like a doctor would image your heart with sound waves. Costs a lot of money but it can tell with you a fair degree of certainty what the structure of the ground is like. That's how you make educated guesses on what formations you want to frac in the first place. You can't do the whole thing, so you need to make educated choices where you want to do it.
However, all that being said, from what other posters are saying and citing in articles, the fraccing I have been exposed to is nothing like the fraccing that is actually going on. Which is partly what I have been saying. That whatever is happening is not so much fraccing related, as it is just reckless engineering and greed.
At this point I am convinced we are not talking about the same process. It has the same name, but is otherwise very different.
The article laid out a process that was flat out nuts and irresponsible. None of the wells I was at were anything like what you are describing. I have a feeling those engineers would not be a part of something that reckless either.
I believe what you are saying and it does not have anything to do with my experiences or understanding of the technology. It's amazing that these are deep wells and you can feel something that far away with sustained seismic activity afterwards. It must be continuous over time, which is not my experience at all. Not to mention much more powerful, which is again amazing, because the fracs I was at were considered within the top 5% of "powerful" fracs. You seem to indicate something at least an order higher in intensity.
There is no way I would support the type of processes you are experiencing where you live and whatever I posted does not seem to apply to your situation.
I think whatever meds you are on you need to adjust the dosage. This would be perfect for you :)
I almost fogot...
The amount of energy released is enough to cause vibration that can be felt on the surface in many areas, sometimes even several miles away.
Not true. At least not with the ones I was witness to which were considered quite large. While I did feel vibrations on the surface, you could not feel them miles away. Not really. You had to being paying attention.
From what that article describes it is not the fraccing that is causing the sustained geological activity, but that craziness of pumping and leaving that much fluid in the ground. I can believe that can cause small quakes over time dependent on just how much you are doing.
No different than geothermal. That has been shown to cause increased seismic activity as well. That I would have expected since you are talking about extracting large amounts of energy.
I read that article and it does not have anything to do with the type of fraccing I have encountered.
That stuff is crazy. The ones I was witness to were anything but shallow, but at 15k feet instead. There was certainly not millions of gallons of fluid. Everything had to be trucked in.
Initially, all the fluid was reclaimed and trucked off site for disposal. That was not pumped back down into the ground to my knowledge at all. Any fluid remaining was extracted over time to a container on the site. I remember that for a few years a truck had to come by every so often to empty it. What I witnessed had practically no impact on the local environment at all. No ponds, fluids, etc. Just a well bore, casing, and a pipeline to take the natural gas to the refinery. That's it.
That article describes a completely different fraccing process. Not to mention none of these walls were horizontal, but vertical. Straight down to 15-20k feet deep.
I will fully admit that what that article talks about seems completely reckless and irresponsible.
Wait... what!?
I was not aware that chicks were all into basements. Maybe when they are 14 and literally have no other place to go and the guy is a jock, but past the time you can have a drivers license? Not so much.
They would only have it done in less time because chicks have this amazing ability to, dependent upon their hotness, to amass armies of men to do their bidding.
You get a half dozen hot chicks in thongs with some beer, and you could easily get two to three times that many men digging a basement for them on the weekend.
Can you say the same for amassing any army of women to do a man's bidding? That is so rare, it is only spoken of in fairy tales, and not actually believed to be true.
It was just an elaborate excuse to convince his wife to let him spend that much time on money on RC toys. In other words, it was a hobby.
Sounds like a pretty fun one too. He can build a man cave down there and showcase the RC toys and be able to tell visitors he created the whole thing with those toys.