Though you're modded "-1, Troll" currently I find your comment pretty interesting. Sometimes life depends on staying put and sucking every last resource a locale has to offer, other times only exploring and finding greener pastures avoided our demise. Certainly both boldness and caution have contributed to our species survival but, considering that humans have spread to nearly every nook and cranny the planet has to offer, my bet is that boldness is the more positive trait.
The thing your are forgetting is most people still listen to their neighborhood geek, and neighborhood geeks are telling them that facebook is all about sucking in the money.
You know what the craziest thing here is? Google makes money by insuring people find your site so they can visit it and you make money by people visiting your web site. How in the world these two obviously compatible aims can end up fighting each other in court is really in the realm of the bizarre. As for "malicious compliance"? I can't fathom a world in which a private company such as Google is forced to provide links to anybody they don't wish to.
Kill Newsbin2 and Newsbin3 will take it's place, kill Niewsbin3 and along comes Newsbin4. Will the MPAA never accept that there is no winning this battle and concentrate it's energies on producing products that people are actually willing to buy instead of trying to continue their failing business model that assumes people will pay for whatever crap they choose to market? Make good movies and people will pay you to make more good movies, make crap and try to market it as gold and people will through shit back in your face.
...there should be no need for it. When a program proven to run on for single processor running at 100mhz can't be run on on one emulating the same at 3000mhz it is time to lay blame squarely at the foot of the emulation environment itself.
...thread seems to be trying to run Window's games under later Window's operating system. Any modern operating system should have no problems emulating hardware environments from the 90's unless they were purposely designed not to do so.
...if it won't run Window's software?. Most everything else is a simple compile away from user's being able to be run on any device they own. Microsoft is really going to screw the pooch here if they don't ensure compatibility with existing software.
The Cheesy humor was what made Stargate good. It was an entertaining show that didn't take itself too seriously and was "fun".
SGU on the other hand tried to be serious, and meaningful. That's not what the Stargate audience wanted (since you know, anyone who didn't want cheesy and fun wouldn't have sat through 10 years of it).
SGU shouldn't have been written as a Stargate Spinoff. if their story was good it should have been able to stand on it's own and by tieing it to a franchise that was so different from the direction they took they pulled an (inadvertent) bait and switch on the viewers.
Absolutely agree, and don't forget the camaraderie. No matter how hard I tried I just couldn't convince myself that SGU was a Stargate series. Still, I'll probably end up buying the DVD set just to complete my collection.
Going by the majority of comments here, let me be the devil's advocate.
In my opinion, what Nokia is trying to do is avoid commoditization of mobile hardware. Symbian was no good for them in terms of features and performance requirements.
Going with Android will effectively make the phone hardware a commodity (like what happened with PCs). Just imagine, with Android becoming ubiquitous everywhere, how long until users are free to choose any mobile phone and transfer their full preferences and data to another Android phone. In that case, competition in mobile hardware industry will remain on the basis of price only.
What I feel is, Nokia is betting on WP7 to stand out from the rest of the pack (Samsung/LG/HTC) in order to maintain their market share.
Will this gamble pay off, only time will tell.
What are the odds of drawing to an inside straight again? Are they worth gambling the future of a more than a century old well respected company over?
It seems like the rooting/jailbreaking/unlocking/modchipping community kinda small; a few geniuses figure it out and publish it in a handy software package for the rest. What does this mean for the future, will the locking/DRM powers outpace them?
Besides the challenge, what's the point of wasting time "jailbreaking" a device nobody cares about? If the vast majority of Apple's customers prefer playing in a locked down garden, so be it. Time is much better spent on working on devices whose users care about openness than those who don't.
Personally I despise GPU accelerated desktops, all I want is a link to an app to click that results after clicking in lauching an app that performs the functions I require. Anyone who needs more should pay a premium for the added eye candy.
And this effects grandma checking her email how? Now that computers are main stream and smart phones nearly so, what difference does it make to the average user if his email loads in 2 seconds or 3?
Let's just let the market forces do their thing here. Personally, I tell anybody I hear thinking about buying NVIDIA to buy AMD instead. Sure, you might get a few more fps today, but tomorrow you may find your card unsupported by the manufacturer with no documentation available to end users on how to fix problems they may encounter in the future. NVIDIA dug their grave, let them sleep in it.
They chose to not release the necessary specs to allow others to utilize their hardware the way Intel and to a lesser extent AMD did, and as the current smartphone trend has shown, locked in is the same as being locked out.
I don't think I said onerous. As I said I think there's room for all the licenses. However the part that keeps GPL code out of DRMed app stores goes beyond source code.
What good does it do an end user to have code he can not use?
I'm not saying that's bad mind you. I only get annoyed when GPL zealots call any other way of doing things evil. But more power to them if they actually write GPL code. I'm really skeptical the average GPL zealot actually contributes much to the community. They more just enjoy getting stuff for free.
What is wrong with getting stuff for free, especially if you received the stuff for free as well?
Most small companies have lawyers on contract, i.e. they pay them per service. You have to be pretty big to afford having lawyers on salary that are just sitting around waiting for you to send them licenses to read through.
The GPL has changed how many times in how many years? Once it's read, it's read. You take, you share. It's basic meaning hasn't changed much at all. Only those looking to find loopholes to violate it have to worry about reading over and over again.
First, a lot of the GPL is open to interpretation. Same goes for pretty much any other license. For example, does a GUI wrapper that calls your GPLed tool fall under the category of a derivative work?
Why do you worry about such minutiae? Write the code to interface with the wrapper and be done with it. What do you care if someone else interfaces with the wrapper in the same manner as you?
You can get sued for anything, and if you fail to uphold a promise you agreed to keep you'd probably even lose. This applies to both copyright and copyleft software.
Slashdot Mirror
Though you're modded "-1, Troll" currently I find your comment pretty interesting. Sometimes life depends on staying put and sucking every last resource a locale has to offer, other times only exploring and finding greener pastures avoided our demise. Certainly both boldness and caution have contributed to our species survival but, considering that humans have spread to nearly every nook and cranny the planet has to offer, my bet is that boldness is the more positive trait.
The thing your are forgetting is most people still listen to their neighborhood geek, and neighborhood geeks are telling them that facebook is all about sucking in the money.
You know what the craziest thing here is? Google makes money by insuring people find your site so they can visit it and you make money by people visiting your web site. How in the world these two obviously compatible aims can end up fighting each other in court is really in the realm of the bizarre. As for "malicious compliance"? I can't fathom a world in which a private company such as Google is forced to provide links to anybody they don't wish to.
Telling the US that it must do something is the best way to get it to do nothing.
Kill Newsbin2 and Newsbin3 will take it's place, kill Niewsbin3 and along comes Newsbin4. Will the MPAA never accept that there is no winning this battle and concentrate it's energies on producing products that people are actually willing to buy instead of trying to continue their failing business model that assumes people will pay for whatever crap they choose to market? Make good movies and people will pay you to make more good movies, make crap and try to market it as gold and people will through shit back in your face.
...and wires interfering with your private life yes, regulation is the answer.
...there should be no need for it. When a program proven to run on for single processor running at 100mhz can't be run on on one emulating the same at 3000mhz it is time to lay blame squarely at the foot of the emulation environment itself.
...hardware from emulating 1990's hardware with ease, and what other than sabotage prevent it from doing so?
...thread seems to be trying to run Window's games under later Window's operating system. Any modern operating system should have no problems emulating hardware environments from the 90's unless they were purposely designed not to do so.
...if it won't run Window's software?. Most everything else is a simple compile away from user's being able to be run on any device they own. Microsoft is really going to screw the pooch here if they don't ensure compatibility with existing software.
The Cheesy humor was what made Stargate good. It was an entertaining show that didn't take itself too seriously and was "fun".
SGU on the other hand tried to be serious, and meaningful. That's not what the Stargate audience wanted (since you know, anyone who didn't want cheesy and fun wouldn't have sat through 10 years of it).
SGU shouldn't have been written as a Stargate Spinoff. if their story was good it should have been able to stand on it's own and by tieing it to a franchise that was so different from the direction they took they pulled an (inadvertent) bait and switch on the viewers.
Absolutely agree, and don't forget the camaraderie. No matter how hard I tried I just couldn't convince myself that SGU was a Stargate series. Still, I'll probably end up buying the DVD set just to complete my collection.
Going by the majority of comments here, let me be the devil's advocate.
In my opinion, what Nokia is trying to do is avoid commoditization of mobile hardware. Symbian was no good for them in terms of features and performance requirements.
Going with Android will effectively make the phone hardware a commodity (like what happened with PCs). Just imagine, with Android becoming ubiquitous everywhere, how long until users are free to choose any mobile phone and transfer their full preferences and data to another Android phone. In that case, competition in mobile hardware industry will remain on the basis of price only.
What I feel is, Nokia is betting on WP7 to stand out from the rest of the pack (Samsung/LG/HTC) in order to maintain their market share.
Will this gamble pay off, only time will tell.
What are the odds of drawing to an inside straight again? Are they worth gambling the future of a more than a century old well respected company over?
It seems like the rooting/jailbreaking/unlocking/modchipping community kinda small; a few geniuses figure it out and publish it in a handy software package for the rest. What does this mean for the future, will the locking/DRM powers outpace them?
Besides the challenge, what's the point of wasting time "jailbreaking" a device nobody cares about? If the vast majority of Apple's customers prefer playing in a locked down garden, so be it. Time is much better spent on working on devices whose users care about openness than those who don't.
Personally I despise GPU accelerated desktops, all I want is a link to an app to click that results after clicking in lauching an app that performs the functions I require. Anyone who needs more should pay a premium for the added eye candy.
And this effects grandma checking her email how? Now that computers are main stream and smart phones nearly so, what difference does it make to the average user if his email loads in 2 seconds or 3?
Other than a few hard core gamers and graphic artists, discrete graphic cards are a total waste of money for most people.
Let's just let the market forces do their thing here. Personally, I tell anybody I hear thinking about buying NVIDIA to buy AMD instead. Sure, you might get a few more fps today, but tomorrow you may find your card unsupported by the manufacturer with no documentation available to end users on how to fix problems they may encounter in the future. NVIDIA dug their grave, let them sleep in it.
They chose to not release the necessary specs to allow others to utilize their hardware the way Intel and to a lesser extent AMD did, and as the current smartphone trend has shown, locked in is the same as being locked out.
I don't think I said onerous. As I said I think there's room for all the licenses. However the part that keeps GPL code out of DRMed app stores goes beyond source code.
What good does it do an end user to have code he can not use?
I'm not saying that's bad mind you. I only get annoyed when GPL zealots call any other way of doing things evil. But more power to them if they actually write GPL code. I'm really skeptical the average GPL zealot actually contributes much to the community. They more just enjoy getting stuff for free.
What is wrong with getting stuff for free, especially if you received the stuff for free as well?
Most small companies have lawyers on contract, i.e. they pay them per service. You have to be pretty big to afford having lawyers on salary that are just sitting around waiting for you to send them licenses to read through.
The GPL has changed how many times in how many years? Once it's read, it's read. You take, you share. It's basic meaning hasn't changed much at all. Only those looking to find loopholes to violate it have to worry about reading over and over again.
First, a lot of the GPL is open to interpretation. Same goes for pretty much any other license. For example, does a GUI wrapper that calls your GPLed tool fall under the category of a derivative work?
Why do you worry about such minutiae? Write the code to interface with the wrapper and be done with it. What do you care if someone else interfaces with the wrapper in the same manner as you?
If you don't want others to use your code, why is it released under an open source license?
So everyone can has the same rights as you to improve and share the code.
I don't think it's so much that the commercial licenses are simpler (ever read your Windows license? Me neither.),
I actually did once, think it was Win 98. That's when I switched to Linux.
You can get sued for anything, and if you fail to uphold a promise you agreed to keep you'd probably even lose. This applies to both copyright and copyleft software.