Do you think there could have been anything different the GOP could have done differently towards the electability of Ron Paul? I am not convinced that the republican party wouldn't love to see a democratic president in this time we are falling into an inescapable recession / depression. Then the party can use that as evidence of needing a republican president just as the economy recovers and take credit for it.
And that is exactly the way he became Pro-Choice and Pro-Gay marriage. He felt in his Christian heart that both were morally wrong and should be illegal, but many of his supporters condemned him. He learned he was entitled to his opinion, but needed to be more open as a politician. Gay marriage and pro-choice are minority issues that a majority of people are going to oppose, but that doesn't make it a good political position, and is very bad policy. He hasn't come around for any other reason, and I can't condemn him for that.
I still don't get the whole "There is no point in trying to talk to them, they are unwilling to listen or really negotiate or make any changes". Their the fascist?!? Last I checked that was the worlds opinion of US!
Can't we at least appear to be the better country, get everyones sympathy for "trying" THEN bomb the shit out of them when they don't do everything we tell them to do?
I really don't think the name is a big deal to anyone but trolls, and not just media trolls. Voting with their head or heart I don't think represents very many people at all. As Obama explained in his book (not like it is a very unique idea, but just to reference) Candidates are whatever the media makes them out to be because the number of people that actually see a candidate in person and catch everything they say in context is virtually irrelevant. 75,000 people showed up in Oregon to listen to Barack Obama. So what? Even if we are just talking about Oregon voters, how many of them by comparison are just going to listen to CNN, ABC, or Fox clips that the news finds the most worthy to air. That being before commentary.
The biggest help for me politically this year has been Library of Congress and OpenCongress.org to find out what our congress is actually doing with all their time. For some perspective, I read "A Living History", "A Woman In Charge", "The Audacity of Hope", and looking forward to reading "The Revolution - A Manifesto". YouTube has also been useful in being able to review speeches. I still listen to CNN and NPR, but it usually bores me to tears the issues they choose to discuss, but it doesn't surprise me anymore. I also strongly value the opinion of Lawrence Lessig. People come to conclusions about candidates in a variety of ways. I still think Ron Paul had the whole "Hope for America" campaign down first, but whatever. I have some understanding and respect for McCain supporters, but I just can't be so cynical all the time. A combination of things tell me who is going to win in November, and that voting here in California won't make a difference, and if it does or doesn't. I will say though, the more I think about Obama's message of hope and argument to give a little faith to the idea that we can change the system and make it better makes me want to vote for Ron Paul.
Despite the fact that the government helped start this, I would not be surprised if not long from now you could have police knocking on your door to ask you why you were using Tor and encrypting traffic. I see it going something like this. "Tor was designed to help people in bad countries help escape political oppression. Why would you need a tool like that in America?". And it just getting worse from there. Remember when a number of state homeland security departments were defining a terrorist as "Someone that opposed big government and gun control"? Before, prostate rights meant you were pro-slavery, now it means you are pro slavery, and a terrorist. If some government agency didn't like you, I am sure they would love to know that you used Tor and ask you questions all day about it, quite possibly from a small white brick room with those ever comfortable orange jump suits.
Wait, they would never want to shut down something like that, just make it illegal. (Sorry, sometimes the voice of Ayn Rand possesses me)
http://stason.org/TULARC/crafts/locksmithing/04-Is-it-legal-to-carry-lock-picks.html
This site seemed to have good info on legality of carrying "burglary equipment" in North America.
CA California California Penal Code Section 466-469. Burglarious And Larcenous Instruments And Deadly Weapons. 466. Every person having upon him or her in his or her possession a picklock, crow, keybit, crowbar, screwdriver, vise grip pliers, water-pump pliers, slidehammer, slim jim, tension bar, lock pick gun, tubular lock pick, floor-safe door puller, master key, ceramic or porcelain spark plug chips or pieces, or other instrument or tool with intent feloniously to break or enter into any building, railroad car, aircraft, or vessel, trailer coach, or vehicle as defined in the Vehicle Code, or who shall knowingly make or alter, or shall attempt to make or alter, any key or other instrument named above so that the same will fit or open the lock of a building, railroad car, aircraft, vessel, trailer coach, or vehicle as defined in the Vehicle Code, without being requested to do so by some person having the right to open the same, or who shall make, alter, or repair any instrument or thing, knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used in committing a misdemeanor or felony, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Any of the structures mentioned in Section 459 shall be deemed to be a building within the meaning of this section. http://www.lockpickguide.com/legalityoflockpicks.html
I was familiar with California law and had friends who were lock smiths; one in particular had just moved to California and was having issues because the state license was not transferable from Montana.
From what I have been told, and from what I have seen / encountered with police at least with respect to guns, knives, and swords you really need to kiss ass in order for the police no not make your day a nightmare. My wife frequently carries a sword (if you ask, you will get a story, you've been warned) and on a very regular basis she is explaining to security and police about both the law and safety precautions she takes.
When what you are doing could be legal, and could be illegal, be prepared to know your rights very well, have a story (a true one), and a lot of time to explain yourself while being very polite.
I live in California, and I would be surprised if your rights in any state would give you the benefit of the doubt that you are a locksmith student if you don't have your paperwork in order. In most all those laws, you need to be the one to prove you DIDN'T have intent, not the other way around. You are left with the burden of proof that you did not break the law, and had no intent of breaking the law either.
Is it really unfair to say that locksmith tools are de facto illegal?
I agree. Everybody taking the side of a majority, while in the best interest of the short term, is promoting exactly what we are complaining about. Everyone being told by the GOP or DNC who to vote for to give that party "the power" seems very similar to the way government works, in the bureaucratic sense. This arguing over what one person has the best chances over some "opponent" certainly has the best strategic advantage. I think Obama is good, but I really want to throw my vote to Ron Paul. People love him, but the media will always support big government (Our copyright law makes me physically ill at times thinking about it, and I will always be grateful to Lessig for opening my eyes to the real potential of the internet). The internet may be an integral part of our lives and infrastructure, but this election has been amazing with respect to the kind of influence the internet has had, and not had, so far on society ass a whole.
Maybe I have become cynical, but for all the complaints about the government, I believe more and more that it is the sum of what we all believe, contradictions, paranoia, and all; a government of the people, by the people, and for the people that can't hardly agree on anything, and scared everything.
That is already true for physical locks. Possession of lock picking equipment is intent. You can not posses the tools without a license that you can not receive without certification that you can't get without going to an approved and certified school. It is unlawful to study outside of approved classrooms. This is why lock picks make so much money, and for anyone into OSS here, why is is also so easy for criminals to pick any lock or work around any theft deterrent device.
In the professional and broadcast video industry, Sony's Betacam, derived from Betamax as a professional format, became one of several standard formats; production houses exchange footage on Betacam videocassettes, and the Betacam system became the most widely used videotape format in the ENG (Electronic News Gathering) industry, replacing the 3/4" U-matic tape format (which was the first practical and cost-effective portable videotape format for broadcast television, signaling the end of 16 mm film â" and the phrase "film at 11" often heard on the six-o-clock newscast, before the film had been developed). The professional derivative of VHS, MII (aka Recam), faced off against Betacam and lost. Once Betacam became the de facto standard of the broadcast industry, its position in the professional market mirrored VHS's dominance in the home-video market. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betamax, Home and Professional Recording As given above, that doesn't seem to align with the info on wikipedia in the Betamax or U-Matic articles. Umatic seems to have been first, but that U-matic was quickly phased out at the time VHS hit the market. If I am misinterpreting this, can you provide a link? Though something I had forgotten previously was the difference between betamax and betacam which were significantly different.
The only thing missing from the article I had been led to believe was that betacam continued its dominance until the introduction of digital formats.
Interesting. I stand corrected. I was not familiar with that format, but something with the quality / performance of Beta in a 3/4" format sounds cool.
An alternative OS with Google Apps and other Web 2.0 apps for the modern user. Sorry, forgot. I installed this for a few friends with OLD IBM thinkpads. Runs GREAT, but using it, I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone that, from using it and looking at the desktop, that the 'g' didn't stand for Google. Virtually EVERYTHING on the OSX like dock is a Google tool.
Funny I would forget it wasn't the Google OS because I had used it more than read about it. Thanks for the correction.
Great example. Backporting. When has this happened in proprietary software (without a court order / threat thereof)? I hope your company has learned its lesson.
While I could understand that from a hypothetical standpoint of a company strongly invested in Microsoft, and mind you that is likely a lot of companies, that doesn't apply to all. There are companies that work on a foundation of open source. Sun and IBM as familiar examples. Each of those companies put in a lot of work towards Linux Kernel, adding features those companies needed, then turning their code over to the F/OSS community. Neither IBM or Sun could develop everything that is called Linux, but being part of the community they get way more than they develop in return. You can take THAT to the bank.
Companies that are deeply invested in F/OSS have little they need to work around to get changes and improvements that they need in their software. Also, dead projects are absorbed into others, but most often they are replaced with better ones. Example, BSD forked into FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. They went different directions on stuff, but continues to share compatible code. By matter of popularity or whatever, FreeBSD has really beating out the others. I think many may say that OpenBSD and NetBSD are dead in many ways, but at the same time FreeBSD has greatly benefited from the project having forked because a conflict managed to play itself out. Basically, if you want OpenBSD, get FreeBSD, and if something is missing that you want from OpenBSD it isn't going to be too hard for XYZ Company to hack that out. It is all a matter of the present position of the company.
Also, I think in your example of $BIG_INTERNAL_APP, you just described proprietary code development. Firing head developer with no one to take over?
I know exactly what you are talking about. I work at a High School, and when I was attending another school in the same district, it was all student run with really only 2 people that supervised and educated the some 30-50 students that were a part of the technology course offered. Students did everything from grant writing to domain management to running wires. We had more money than we could figure out what to do with (mind you it was the beginning of the tech boom) as every piece of equipment got donated one way or another. It was a masterpiece. Till a hitch came about... many of the scripts / configurations were written by students without documentation meaning that once that student graduated, anything that broke or needed to be reconfigured would need to be done from scratch. Mind you, among the 30-50 students that were there for 4-8 hours a week, there were usually about 8-12 that put in 40-60 hours a week.
The project was scrapped. Now, instead of student labor, there are now 4 people that don't teach anyone anything, and are relied on completely to maintain the network. So we went from 2 teachers to 4 non teachers being paid that are doing 1% of the work possible before. No new equipment upgrades in the last 6 years because it isn't anyones "job" to write grants, and the school can't/doesn't afford to upgrade. I have been able to push F/OSS in my own classroom, but trying to talk to IT about saving money with F/OSS. I was actually told that it was cheaper to buy Office 2007 than to retrain all the staff in OpenOffice. My thought was retrain what? The network is usually down for 15-20 minutes every day and they complain that they just don't have the time or money to fix the problems. Or that it just isn't important enough to have the network up "every hour of every day". And guess what? more IT budget cuts next year. I say GOOD, they are wasting the money they have anyway and it could be put to better use. Even if Microsoft tools were the best, IMHO we could really use something MUCH cheaper that is good and gets the job done. The $50,000+ whatever to move to Office 2007 versus the Free OpenOffice2.4/2.6. That is really justified? You show me justification for a school to buy Office 2007, and I'll show you a community that will vote Yes on education budget cuts.
If they would just keep it working so teachers didn't have so many problems, I wouldn't be complaining about what they used or what it (necessarily) cost. I am mocked for pushing F/OSS, and guess who gets called on when when their stuff doesn't work? I don't get it.
On the premise that Microsoft is better at everything, is it not relevant as to WHY and HOW Microsoft has dominated? Is it so terrible that some may work very hard and aggressively to do what is necessary to revitalize an industry that has been destroyed by "predatory marketing, anti-competitive and illegal practices". Lets just say it is coincidental that an F/OSS community was large enough to potentially break loose Microsoft terrorism. Novell is a proprietary software developer that was beating out Microsoft for a long time, so did HP, IBM, Sun, and many others. But look at what happened to them?
Should we just accept that Microsoft is the all powerful software and OS overlord that we need to pay homage to if we want to be successful in the business world (of course so long as that development doesn't threaten a single penny Microsoft might want to collect in the future).
Microsoft is killing the money in proprietary software, not F/OSS. Does that really mean nothing? People need innovation, and while GPL may be behind in a lot of ways, can you show me another strong competitor to what Microsoft decides is good enough? Apple?
Not to mention that Betamax was a leading industry standard in commercial video recorders, particularly in news media. Remember those GIANT camcorders news people used to carry? Those were ALL Betamax. Betamax died in the retail market (mind you that is a very big market), but Beta wasn't replaced until digital solutions came along.
Also, remember Sony was a crazy control freak over their invention. VHS was an open standard that was virtually free to develop, among many reasons why Beta failed in the US/European retail market. So many industry analysts claimed VHS was going to be the death of so many industries, but they were wrong... can we even count the ways?
I think you were just trolling, but whatever. Companies do pay for FOSS development. Sometimes they share their innovations, sometimes not. Often people write software for themselves to accomplish a task that makes them money. It is "worthless" in that the software was only a means to an end and there would be no economic harm to the developer in giving away something that wasn't their business.
F/OSS is destroying opportunities for programmers about as quickly as free cookbooks have destroyed the restaurant industry for chefs. Sorry, not going to buy it. And before you respond with "Well, you can't just go into a restaurant and ask the chef for his recipe." Yes you can, and I've done it. I cook a lot, and on the rare occasion that I make it to a nice restaurant, I'll spend some time talking it up with the chef and they, so far, always been delighted to share their recipes. For what it is worth, I have only done this five times, cause I am sure you are asking yourself. Are you really going to claim that the dynamic range and competitiveness for restaurants is weaker than software development?
Geez, so many issues to address. One thing at a time...
Sure lots of F/OSS projects die for MANY reasons, and they may not may not be picked up by someone in the future, but compared to what? BeOS was a project many companies got invested in and that project died and CAN'T be picked up by anyone else. Microsoft has had many projects they bought, and then never further developed because it wasn't in their best financial interests. With proprietary software it has to be within the financial interests of the rights holder to develop the project further. In the F/OSS world ANYONE with the need, desire, and ability can improve on any project be it going strong or a decade abandoned.
Much more importantly, can we agree at least that sometimes writing code takes a little more effort than sitting at the computer punching out your ideas? Sometimes it really takes the collaboration of great minds to develop great software. Google has the power to buy just about anyone it wants. I've heard they are about the only company that can buy developers away from Microsoft. The point is that some software, or even any invention, is only useful as something to sell. How many retail stores likely survive not because it they sell anything worth a darn, but has things that make "good" gifts? Look at the whole teddy bear and gift basket industry. Cards have a utilitarian value, but look at all the things that can only be sold around Christmas because the products are worthless to the buyer. Personally, I see a lot of this "economic development" suffering from the Broken Window Fallacy. I go into Fry's all the time and the walls are just lined with crapware with scare tactics to get people to buy them.
So here is the contrast: There is no way to succeed financially from developing Linux crapware. OH NO! What ever will we do?!? Some business secrets need to be held closely, and at other times tools for doing business create competitiveness that drives your markets growth. As with any market, its growth can make or break any business.
Take Avid Technology as an example: They sell sound equipment and software. Their advertising campaign tries to tell people about all the things they can do with their stuff. Mostly musicians. But what if all that was open source? A community of all kinds of artists could educate people on the many applications of sound equipment for home or industrial use. Their software? They have the industries best! What would they have to gain from open-sourcing their software? Well, Red Hat isn't doing too bad. Avid is already leading the industry and has a well respected name. Official support to clients and most timely updates. Up and rising artists/programmers could improve on the best software in the world! They also lead in fabricating specialized equipment... and this would be hurt how by expanding the market into an even larger community? Some will pay to have everything just work and delivered in a professional way, while others with less money will buy essential equipment and hack out the rest. Avid is ahead because it continues to hire the best in industry and researching its game. Are they done innovating and just surviving on being ahead of everyone else, or are they really leading the industry in strong ways that people will continue to respect?
This reminds me of the Tortoise and the Hare. Slow and steady can win the race, but was there any reason why the Hare could not have had some kind of work ethic to win the race also? Microsoft is an old, blind, and senile rabbit that knows nothing better about how to win a race than laying bear traps, land mines, and talking smack about the tortoise. In any given race, the rabbit should be able to win with hard work. To relate more closely to F/OSS, F/OSS is a pace car that lets anyone jump into the race at any time. There are just two options, and they can be tough to pick from depending on what you want your software to do. Is your software the secret, or just something that helps your business that can be improved on? BSD/MIT and
Weird. I most always preview carefully. The download took "...about 10 minutes". Another thing I'll add is that I often use the excuse "I don't do Windows" to discourage people from getting geeks, or maybe just this geek, from maintaining other peoples M$ nightmares. I have also learned not to "sell" Linux anymore. I get enough people on a regular basis that already want Linux that I can assist in letting THEM learn how to do it. Saves my sanity, and I find the people I am spending time teaching appreciate it a lot more.
Glad someone enjoyed reading it. When previewing, which I evidently failed at, I was worried it was way too anecdotal.
The moral I've taken from this experience and too many like it, is Windows "post install setup" is much too long for what you get. Linux shortcomings feel more like the short comings of gravity, while Windows feels more like the shortcomings of a police state.
The nice thing about Linux is that it would be easy enough for one of Mark Shuttleworth's minions to build one tweaked DVD for all the machines. Setups on Windows machines are likely very similar. Considering the power offered in free slip streaming software, I'll bet Dell has access to even better stuff to get all that crapware on the desktop in no time. I find it very unlikely any tech actually does anything to an installed system beyond a burn in test, if that.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think there could have been anything different the GOP could have done differently towards the electability of Ron Paul? I am not convinced that the republican party wouldn't love to see a democratic president in this time we are falling into an inescapable recession / depression. Then the party can use that as evidence of needing a republican president just as the economy recovers and take credit for it.
And that is exactly the way he became Pro-Choice and Pro-Gay marriage. He felt in his Christian heart that both were morally wrong and should be illegal, but many of his supporters condemned him. He learned he was entitled to his opinion, but needed to be more open as a politician. Gay marriage and pro-choice are minority issues that a majority of people are going to oppose, but that doesn't make it a good political position, and is very bad policy. He hasn't come around for any other reason, and I can't condemn him for that.
And the investigations on part of the FTC is just a formality?
I still don't get the whole "There is no point in trying to talk to them, they are unwilling to listen or really negotiate or make any changes". Their the fascist?!? Last I checked that was the worlds opinion of US!
Can't we at least appear to be the better country, get everyones sympathy for "trying" THEN bomb the shit out of them when they don't do everything we tell them to do?
I really don't think the name is a big deal to anyone but trolls, and not just media trolls. Voting with their head or heart I don't think represents very many people at all. As Obama explained in his book (not like it is a very unique idea, but just to reference) Candidates are whatever the media makes them out to be because the number of people that actually see a candidate in person and catch everything they say in context is virtually irrelevant. 75,000 people showed up in Oregon to listen to Barack Obama. So what? Even if we are just talking about Oregon voters, how many of them by comparison are just going to listen to CNN, ABC, or Fox clips that the news finds the most worthy to air. That being before commentary.
The biggest help for me politically this year has been Library of Congress and OpenCongress.org to find out what our congress is actually doing with all their time. For some perspective, I read "A Living History", "A Woman In Charge", "The Audacity of Hope", and looking forward to reading "The Revolution - A Manifesto". YouTube has also been useful in being able to review speeches. I still listen to CNN and NPR, but it usually bores me to tears the issues they choose to discuss, but it doesn't surprise me anymore. I also strongly value the opinion of Lawrence Lessig. People come to conclusions about candidates in a variety of ways. I still think Ron Paul had the whole "Hope for America" campaign down first, but whatever. I have some understanding and respect for McCain supporters, but I just can't be so cynical all the time. A combination of things tell me who is going to win in November, and that voting here in California won't make a difference, and if it does or doesn't. I will say though, the more I think about Obama's message of hope and argument to give a little faith to the idea that we can change the system and make it better makes me want to vote for Ron Paul.
Despite the fact that the government helped start this, I would not be surprised if not long from now you could have police knocking on your door to ask you why you were using Tor and encrypting traffic. I see it going something like this. "Tor was designed to help people in bad countries help escape political oppression. Why would you need a tool like that in America?". And it just getting worse from there. Remember when a number of state homeland security departments were defining a terrorist as "Someone that opposed big government and gun control"? Before, prostate rights meant you were pro-slavery, now it means you are pro slavery, and a terrorist. If some government agency didn't like you, I am sure they would love to know that you used Tor and ask you questions all day about it, quite possibly from a small white brick room with those ever comfortable orange jump suits.
Wait, they would never want to shut down something like that, just make it illegal. (Sorry, sometimes the voice of Ayn Rand possesses me)
I was familiar with California law and had friends who were lock smiths; one in particular had just moved to California and was having issues because the state license was not transferable from Montana.
From what I have been told, and from what I have seen / encountered with police at least with respect to guns, knives, and swords you really need to kiss ass in order for the police no not make your day a nightmare. My wife frequently carries a sword (if you ask, you will get a story, you've been warned) and on a very regular basis she is explaining to security and police about both the law and safety precautions she takes.
When what you are doing could be legal, and could be illegal, be prepared to know your rights very well, have a story (a true one), and a lot of time to explain yourself while being very polite.
I live in California, and I would be surprised if your rights in any state would give you the benefit of the doubt that you are a locksmith student if you don't have your paperwork in order. In most all those laws, you need to be the one to prove you DIDN'T have intent, not the other way around. You are left with the burden of proof that you did not break the law, and had no intent of breaking the law either.
Is it really unfair to say that locksmith tools are de facto illegal?
I agree. Everybody taking the side of a majority, while in the best interest of the short term, is promoting exactly what we are complaining about. Everyone being told by the GOP or DNC who to vote for to give that party "the power" seems very similar to the way government works, in the bureaucratic sense. This arguing over what one person has the best chances over some "opponent" certainly has the best strategic advantage. I think Obama is good, but I really want to throw my vote to Ron Paul. People love him, but the media will always support big government (Our copyright law makes me physically ill at times thinking about it, and I will always be grateful to Lessig for opening my eyes to the real potential of the internet). The internet may be an integral part of our lives and infrastructure, but this election has been amazing with respect to the kind of influence the internet has had, and not had, so far on society ass a whole.
Maybe I have become cynical, but for all the complaints about the government, I believe more and more that it is the sum of what we all believe, contradictions, paranoia, and all; a government of the people, by the people, and for the people that can't hardly agree on anything, and scared everything.
That is already true for physical locks. Possession of lock picking equipment is intent. You can not posses the tools without a license that you can not receive without certification that you can't get without going to an approved and certified school. It is unlawful to study outside of approved classrooms. This is why lock picks make so much money, and for anyone into OSS here, why is is also so easy for criminals to pick any lock or work around any theft deterrent device.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betamax, Home and Professional Recording As given above, that doesn't seem to align with the info on wikipedia in the Betamax or U-Matic articles. Umatic seems to have been first, but that U-matic was quickly phased out at the time VHS hit the market. If I am misinterpreting this, can you provide a link? Though something I had forgotten previously was the difference between betamax and betacam which were significantly different.
The only thing missing from the article I had been led to believe was that betacam continued its dominance until the introduction of digital formats.
Interesting. I stand corrected. I was not familiar with that format, but something with the quality / performance of Beta in a 3/4" format sounds cool.
Funny I would forget it wasn't the Google OS because I had used it more than read about it. Thanks for the correction.
Great example. Backporting. When has this happened in proprietary software (without a court order / threat thereof)? I hope your company has learned its lesson.
While I could understand that from a hypothetical standpoint of a company strongly invested in Microsoft, and mind you that is likely a lot of companies, that doesn't apply to all. There are companies that work on a foundation of open source. Sun and IBM as familiar examples. Each of those companies put in a lot of work towards Linux Kernel, adding features those companies needed, then turning their code over to the F/OSS community. Neither IBM or Sun could develop everything that is called Linux, but being part of the community they get way more than they develop in return. You can take THAT to the bank.
Companies that are deeply invested in F/OSS have little they need to work around to get changes and improvements that they need in their software. Also, dead projects are absorbed into others, but most often they are replaced with better ones. Example, BSD forked into FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. They went different directions on stuff, but continues to share compatible code. By matter of popularity or whatever, FreeBSD has really beating out the others. I think many may say that OpenBSD and NetBSD are dead in many ways, but at the same time FreeBSD has greatly benefited from the project having forked because a conflict managed to play itself out. Basically, if you want OpenBSD, get FreeBSD, and if something is missing that you want from OpenBSD it isn't going to be too hard for XYZ Company to hack that out. It is all a matter of the present position of the company.
Also, I think in your example of $BIG_INTERNAL_APP, you just described proprietary code development. Firing head developer with no one to take over?
I know exactly what you are talking about. I work at a High School, and when I was attending another school in the same district, it was all student run with really only 2 people that supervised and educated the some 30-50 students that were a part of the technology course offered. Students did everything from grant writing to domain management to running wires. We had more money than we could figure out what to do with (mind you it was the beginning of the tech boom) as every piece of equipment got donated one way or another. It was a masterpiece. Till a hitch came about... many of the scripts / configurations were written by students without documentation meaning that once that student graduated, anything that broke or needed to be reconfigured would need to be done from scratch. Mind you, among the 30-50 students that were there for 4-8 hours a week, there were usually about 8-12 that put in 40-60 hours a week.
The project was scrapped. Now, instead of student labor, there are now 4 people that don't teach anyone anything, and are relied on completely to maintain the network. So we went from 2 teachers to 4 non teachers being paid that are doing 1% of the work possible before. No new equipment upgrades in the last 6 years because it isn't anyones "job" to write grants, and the school can't/doesn't afford to upgrade. I have been able to push F/OSS in my own classroom, but trying to talk to IT about saving money with F/OSS. I was actually told that it was cheaper to buy Office 2007 than to retrain all the staff in OpenOffice. My thought was retrain what? The network is usually down for 15-20 minutes every day and they complain that they just don't have the time or money to fix the problems. Or that it just isn't important enough to have the network up "every hour of every day". And guess what? more IT budget cuts next year. I say GOOD, they are wasting the money they have anyway and it could be put to better use. Even if Microsoft tools were the best, IMHO we could really use something MUCH cheaper that is good and gets the job done. The $50,000+ whatever to move to Office 2007 versus the Free OpenOffice2.4/2.6. That is really justified? You show me justification for a school to buy Office 2007, and I'll show you a community that will vote Yes on education budget cuts.
If they would just keep it working so teachers didn't have so many problems, I wouldn't be complaining about what they used or what it (necessarily) cost. I am mocked for pushing F/OSS, and guess who gets called on when when their stuff doesn't work? I don't get it.
On the premise that Microsoft is better at everything, is it not relevant as to WHY and HOW Microsoft has dominated? Is it so terrible that some may work very hard and aggressively to do what is necessary to revitalize an industry that has been destroyed by "predatory marketing, anti-competitive and illegal practices". Lets just say it is coincidental that an F/OSS community was large enough to potentially break loose Microsoft terrorism. Novell is a proprietary software developer that was beating out Microsoft for a long time, so did HP, IBM, Sun, and many others. But look at what happened to them?
Should we just accept that Microsoft is the all powerful software and OS overlord that we need to pay homage to if we want to be successful in the business world (of course so long as that development doesn't threaten a single penny Microsoft might want to collect in the future).
Microsoft is killing the money in proprietary software, not F/OSS. Does that really mean nothing? People need innovation, and while GPL may be behind in a lot of ways, can you show me another strong competitor to what Microsoft decides is good enough? Apple?
And isn't it sad that so many people don't understand that?
Not to mention that Betamax was a leading industry standard in commercial video recorders, particularly in news media. Remember those GIANT camcorders news people used to carry? Those were ALL Betamax. Betamax died in the retail market (mind you that is a very big market), but Beta wasn't replaced until digital solutions came along.
Also, remember Sony was a crazy control freak over their invention. VHS was an open standard that was virtually free to develop, among many reasons why Beta failed in the US/European retail market. So many industry analysts claimed VHS was going to be the death of so many industries, but they were wrong... can we even count the ways?
I think you were just trolling, but whatever. Companies do pay for FOSS development. Sometimes they share their innovations, sometimes not. Often people write software for themselves to accomplish a task that makes them money. It is "worthless" in that the software was only a means to an end and there would be no economic harm to the developer in giving away something that wasn't their business.
F/OSS is destroying opportunities for programmers about as quickly as free cookbooks have destroyed the restaurant industry for chefs. Sorry, not going to buy it. And before you respond with "Well, you can't just go into a restaurant and ask the chef for his recipe." Yes you can, and I've done it. I cook a lot, and on the rare occasion that I make it to a nice restaurant, I'll spend some time talking it up with the chef and they, so far, always been delighted to share their recipes. For what it is worth, I have only done this five times, cause I am sure you are asking yourself. Are you really going to claim that the dynamic range and competitiveness for restaurants is weaker than software development?
gOS is still bundled with machines sold at Walmart.
Geez, so many issues to address. One thing at a time...
Sure lots of F/OSS projects die for MANY reasons, and they may not may not be picked up by someone in the future, but compared to what? BeOS was a project many companies got invested in and that project died and CAN'T be picked up by anyone else. Microsoft has had many projects they bought, and then never further developed because it wasn't in their best financial interests. With proprietary software it has to be within the financial interests of the rights holder to develop the project further. In the F/OSS world ANYONE with the need, desire, and ability can improve on any project be it going strong or a decade abandoned.
Much more importantly, can we agree at least that sometimes writing code takes a little more effort than sitting at the computer punching out your ideas? Sometimes it really takes the collaboration of great minds to develop great software. Google has the power to buy just about anyone it wants. I've heard they are about the only company that can buy developers away from Microsoft. The point is that some software, or even any invention, is only useful as something to sell. How many retail stores likely survive not because it they sell anything worth a darn, but has things that make "good" gifts? Look at the whole teddy bear and gift basket industry. Cards have a utilitarian value, but look at all the things that can only be sold around Christmas because the products are worthless to the buyer. Personally, I see a lot of this "economic development" suffering from the Broken Window Fallacy. I go into Fry's all the time and the walls are just lined with crapware with scare tactics to get people to buy them.
So here is the contrast:
There is no way to succeed financially from developing Linux crapware. OH NO! What ever will we do?!? Some business secrets need to be held closely, and at other times tools for doing business create competitiveness that drives your markets growth. As with any market, its growth can make or break any business.
Take Avid Technology as an example: They sell sound equipment and software. Their advertising campaign tries to tell people about all the things they can do with their stuff. Mostly musicians. But what if all that was open source? A community of all kinds of artists could educate people on the many applications of sound equipment for home or industrial use. Their software? They have the industries best! What would they have to gain from open-sourcing their software? Well, Red Hat isn't doing too bad. Avid is already leading the industry and has a well respected name. Official support to clients and most timely updates. Up and rising artists/programmers could improve on the best software in the world! They also lead in fabricating specialized equipment... and this would be hurt how by expanding the market into an even larger community? Some will pay to have everything just work and delivered in a professional way, while others with less money will buy essential equipment and hack out the rest. Avid is ahead because it continues to hire the best in industry and researching its game. Are they done innovating and just surviving on being ahead of everyone else, or are they really leading the industry in strong ways that people will continue to respect?
This reminds me of the Tortoise and the Hare. Slow and steady can win the race, but was there any reason why the Hare could not have had some kind of work ethic to win the race also? Microsoft is an old, blind, and senile rabbit that knows nothing better about how to win a race than laying bear traps, land mines, and talking smack about the tortoise. In any given race, the rabbit should be able to win with hard work. To relate more closely to F/OSS, F/OSS is a pace car that lets anyone jump into the race at any time. There are just two options, and they can be tough to pick from depending on what you want your software to do. Is your software the secret, or just something that helps your business that can be improved on? BSD/MIT and
Weird. I most always preview carefully. The download took "...about 10 minutes". Another thing I'll add is that I often use the excuse "I don't do Windows" to discourage people from getting geeks, or maybe just this geek, from maintaining other peoples M$ nightmares. I have also learned not to "sell" Linux anymore. I get enough people on a regular basis that already want Linux that I can assist in letting THEM learn how to do it. Saves my sanity, and I find the people I am spending time teaching appreciate it a lot more.
Glad someone enjoyed reading it. When previewing, which I evidently failed at, I was worried it was way too anecdotal.
The moral I've taken from this experience and too many like it, is Windows "post install setup" is much too long for what you get. Linux shortcomings feel more like the short comings of gravity, while Windows feels more like the shortcomings of a police state.
The nice thing about Linux is that it would be easy enough for one of Mark Shuttleworth's minions to build one tweaked DVD for all the machines. Setups on Windows machines are likely very similar. Considering the power offered in free slip streaming software, I'll bet Dell has access to even better stuff to get all that crapware on the desktop in no time. I find it very unlikely any tech actually does anything to an installed system beyond a burn in test, if that.
Just curious, if you know what you want so exactly, why not just build your own machine?
I think Anonymous Coward was trolling, if not atleast for the fact they mispelled "nVidea"(sic)