i was worried for a minute there...i was looking at the Clansoft site, marveling at what they'd managed to do in linux, but worrying about the lack of a reference to the LGPL on the front page...luckily, however, Clanlib is actually under the LGPL...which is why i have no issues with declaring:
VIVA CLANSOFT!
when games become as natural a part of linux as ls and grep, i will be quite the happy camper...
Anyone else remember the little robotic dog in Woody Allen's movie "Sleeper?" IIRC, it was a little terrier-like thing that just walked around saying "hello, my name is ruff!"
I don't know what definition of "competition" that you guys are using, but my definition implies that there will be winners and losers.
Actually, from an economic standpoint (the considerable inaccuracy of modern economic theory notwithstanding), competition is precisely the state of having no "winners" or "losers." The problem with Microsoft is that in the OS "industry," there is no competition anymore. Competition is good from a consumer standpoint because perfect competition forces prices down to the cost per unit of production (i.e. zero-profit), so that there isn't a ridiculous transfer of wealth from consumers to corporations (and their shareholders).
Why should consumers be preferred over corporations? Well, consumers are people, while corporations are formal legal entities. There's a reason corporations can't vote in the voting booth (why do you think they contribute so much money to political campaigns?)--the elected government is supposed to protect the populace (i.e. consumers) from individuals who don't have the best interests of the populace at heart (i.e. corporations like Standard Oil, AT&T, and Microsoft before legiaslation). As representative and guardian of the populace at large, it is the duty of the government to protect the consumers' interests. In the case of anti-trust law, this means making sure that corporations cannot stifle competition and thus use a monopolistic pricing scheme.
That so many people seem to support the theft of this revenue, rather than legitimately producing something better, disheartens me.
Actually, better things have been legitimately produced throughout the late eighties and nineties, but the sheer force of Microsoft's monopoly has prevented these (better) technologies from getting off the ground. Probably the best example of this is IBM's OS/2 Warp, which was released shortly before the launch of Microsoft's Windows 95 (and the accompanying "Start" campaign). OS/2 was in many ways better equipped to deal with the environment of the mid-nineties (the mainstream onset of the Internet and corporate computer networks) but Win95, which until very late in the game was devoid of substantial Internet infrastructure, went on to consume the market.
A comparable situation to this is the VHS-Beta wars of the early eighties, which as we all know VHS won. That battle, however, was much more compatible with perfect competition, because VHS and Beta were open standards, and thus commodities. There are many, many licensees of the VHS specification, which is why blank videocassettes are so cheap. This is an example of commodity (competitive) pricing. All the Microsoft lawsuit is trying to do is produce (artificially, if necessary) a state of commodity pricing in the PC OS industry. Linux and the BSD's are the world's first commodity operating systems, and the success of that model in the market is already becoming clear. All the DOJ wants to do is make Windows into a commodity, not a pivot of monopolistic power.
And ANYONE can sit around and theorize about things that are unobservable (be they crap-spewing philosophers, theologians, or abstract mathematicians).
I object to my kind being lumped together with philosphers and theologians. While philosophers and theologians believe that the crap they spew can help to understand the natural world (which I agree is a completely faulty notion), mathematicians understand that from the get-go they are dealing with the world of the imagination, not anything "real." We've just chosen to recede into our heads, as opposed to surrounding ourselves with delusions about the Universe.
For years, IBM has resented the dirty license trick Billy pulled on him by restricting the MS-DOS license to Microsoft, not IBM...now, with linux, IBM has a chance to return the favor, answering Gates' license with a dirty license trick of their own: the GPL.
how about an Ender's game style space combat sim, where you strategize in true 3-space against an enemy (neural-net, perhaps?) which can learn from your strategy...
This is gross. Whatever happened to freedom around here, anyway? Lyrics.ch provides a wonderful service to the rest of us (its owner devoting a shitload of time and money to the project, I might add, without so much as a cent in profit) and then out of the blue, this poor man's sweat and tears are appropriated by a couple of New York suits with bills bursting from their pockets.
I suppose this would be all well and good if the lawyers would let the guy do things the way he always did them, even if that required a contract with the NMPA. But (as noted in the article) what about censorship? Record companies self-censor all the time, and a profit-sharing (read, profit-forcing) deal would probably include such a clause.
A multinational corporation is like a great, globe-spanning amoeba, consuming anything and everything that comes in its path. What does it show for it? It gets bigger and bigger and bigger...
Greed drives the corporate world, and greed will tear the rest of us apart.
Slashdot Mirror
i was worried for a minute there...i was looking at the Clansoft site, marveling at what they'd managed to do in linux, but worrying about the lack of a reference to the LGPL on the front page...luckily, however, Clanlib is actually under the LGPL...which is why i have no issues with declaring:
VIVA CLANSOFT!
when games become as natural a part of linux as ls and grep, i will be quite the happy camper...
-josh
Too bad it was for the 21st, unless you had a gut feeling Lucas'd move the date up to the 19th...
Of course, maybe you just expected to be waiting in the line for the whole week, and so you're all good...
Anyone else remember the little robotic dog in Woody Allen's movie "Sleeper?" IIRC, it was a little terrier-like thing that just walked around saying "hello, my name is ruff!"
flashbacks galore...
If everyone's using a standard, the standard should be open, dammit!
(or at least have a linux version)
I want to see that dog!
I don't know what definition of "competition" that you guys are using, but my definition implies that there will be winners and losers.
Actually, from an economic standpoint (the considerable inaccuracy of modern economic theory notwithstanding), competition is precisely the state of having no "winners" or "losers." The problem with Microsoft is that in the OS "industry," there is no competition anymore. Competition is good from a consumer standpoint because perfect competition forces prices down to the cost per unit of production (i.e. zero-profit), so that there isn't a ridiculous transfer of wealth from consumers to corporations (and their shareholders).
Why should consumers be preferred over corporations? Well, consumers are people, while corporations are formal legal entities. There's a reason corporations can't vote in the voting booth (why do you think they contribute so much money to political campaigns?)--the elected government is supposed to protect the populace (i.e. consumers) from individuals who don't have the best interests of the populace at heart (i.e. corporations like Standard Oil, AT&T, and Microsoft before legiaslation). As representative and guardian of the populace at large, it is the duty of the government to protect the consumers' interests. In the case of anti-trust law, this means making sure that corporations cannot stifle competition and thus use a monopolistic pricing scheme.
That so many people seem to support the theft of this revenue, rather than legitimately producing something better, disheartens me.
Actually, better things have been legitimately produced throughout the late eighties and nineties, but the sheer force of Microsoft's monopoly has prevented these (better) technologies from getting off the ground. Probably the best example of this is IBM's OS/2 Warp, which was released shortly before the launch of Microsoft's Windows 95 (and the accompanying "Start" campaign). OS/2 was in many ways better equipped to deal with the environment of the mid-nineties (the mainstream onset of the Internet and corporate computer networks) but Win95, which until very late in the game was devoid of substantial Internet infrastructure, went on to consume the market.
A comparable situation to this is the VHS-Beta wars of the early eighties, which as we all know VHS won. That battle, however, was much more compatible with perfect competition, because VHS and Beta were open standards, and thus commodities. There are many, many licensees of the VHS specification, which is why blank videocassettes are so cheap. This is an example of commodity (competitive) pricing. All the Microsoft lawsuit is trying to do is produce (artificially, if necessary) a state of commodity pricing in the PC OS industry. Linux and the BSD's are the world's first commodity operating systems, and the success of that model in the market is already becoming clear. All the DOJ wants to do is make Windows into a commodity, not a pivot of monopolistic power.
-josh
Likely most everyone who would be sending birthday wishes to CT will be waiting in line for Star Wars...hey, maybe May 19th is the man's b-day!
And ANYONE can sit around and theorize about things that are unobservable (be they crap-spewing philosophers, theologians, or abstract mathematicians).
I object to my kind being lumped together with philosphers and theologians. While philosophers and theologians believe that the crap they spew can help to understand the natural world (which I agree is a completely faulty notion), mathematicians understand that from the get-go they are dealing with the world of the imagination, not anything "real." We've just chosen to recede into our heads, as opposed to surrounding ourselves with delusions about the Universe.
-josh
40% when i checked it last...let's go for 50!
For years, IBM has resented the dirty license trick Billy pulled on him by restricting the MS-DOS license to Microsoft, not IBM...now, with linux, IBM has a chance to return the favor, answering Gates' license with a dirty license trick of their own: the GPL.
It's payback time.
(see subject)
Methinks this eloquence is wasted on the choir...
how about an Ender's game style space combat sim, where you strategize in true 3-space against an enemy (neural-net, perhaps?) which can learn from your strategy...
This is gross. Whatever happened to freedom around here, anyway? Lyrics.ch provides a wonderful service to the rest of us (its owner devoting a shitload of time and money to the project, I might add, without so much as a cent in profit) and then out of the blue, this poor man's sweat and tears are appropriated by a couple of New York suits with bills bursting from their pockets.
I suppose this would be all well and good if the lawyers would let the guy do things the way he always did them, even if that required a contract with the NMPA. But (as noted in the article) what about censorship? Record companies self-censor all the time, and a profit-sharing (read, profit-forcing) deal would probably include such a clause.
A multinational corporation is like a great, globe-spanning amoeba, consuming anything and everything that comes in its path. What does it show for it? It gets bigger and bigger and bigger...
Greed drives the corporate world, and greed will tear the rest of us apart.
LONG LIVE LYRICS.CH!
Can't wait.
Who are they? Where did they come from? And , most importantly, how the hell did they scrape up three times our kkeys/sec?
finally...
someone realizes that Apple does not have a monopoly on sleek-ass box hooked up to sleek-ass hardware...
-Lupus