I believe Archie comics caved long before court action (something about bad publicity from suing a 1-year old baby). Since it was settled, no legal precedent was set.
> Lessening the amount of money to get that approval would, IMO, be a better way of "fixing" it.
The reason it costs so much is because of the all the testing done to "prove" that it works and to test the safety.
After the recent fen/fen (sp?) disaster, it seems unlikely that the FDA will seek to make drug approval any easier.
There is certainly a LOT of room for improvement with current IP legislation. The Patent Office clearly has issued some insane patents; the distributors seem to hold the copyright on music rather than the artists; the lifetime of an IT patent is insanely long for the modern world; the cost of litigation prevents challenges to IP; etc...
Any reform, however, has to face the modern political realities. The FSF foundation has made a difference because they didn't have to change any laws. But if you wanna take this revolution to Washington and abolish (or even lessen) IP, you'll have every large corporation on the planet against you...
Consider the drug DMSO. It's been around for a long time... so long that the patent has expired and anyone can produce it.
Since the patent expired, some researchers have found evidence that DMSO may be a cure for arthritis. However, any company that wanted to market DMSO as an arthritis cure would have to spend over $500 milion to get approval from the FDA... but they would NOT get patent protection. Once Company A spent all that money, anyone could then sell their generic brand.
I can't *prove* that this is the reason no one's bothered to spend the money to get it approved, but I have my suspicions.
How do you propose to create an empirical test to see if innovation will stop without IP? I can't think of any, short of abolishing it and see what happens.
The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was passed because the Rockefellers were trying to raise the costs for their competitors, the House of Morgan (see _Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics_, Vol 1, Issue 1, Spring 98).
The Interstate Commerce Commission was the first federal regulatory body. It was created at the behest of those that argued that the railroads were acting as a cartel and doing crazy things like charging different prices depending on destination! The ICC's job was to regulate prices. The first ICC commissioner (a former railroad lawyer) raised the discounted rates and, for the first time, the railroads were able to ENFORCE their cartel.
If greed is so evil, how do you keep the greedy from running for office?
Dred Scott doesn't seem like a plausible cause to me. The primary even leading to the war was *Southern* secession. Why would the South secede if they "won" the slavery issue in the Supreme Court?
Further, if the war *started* because of slavery, why wasn't the Emancipation Proclamation made *before* the South seceded? The war clearly became a war over slavery, and tensions over slavery can certainly be cited as reasons for the South feeling pressured, but Dred Scott looks like a battle the South won.
TealDoc (shareware with a 1 second nag and nothing crippled) for the Palm Pilot has an autoscroll function, and you can vary the speed. If your text is in HTML (which most bleeding edge tech stuff is), you should be able to convert to a DOC format.
We who?/.ers? They criticize EVERYTHING (after all, you're criticizing people for being to critical). Bruce et al? Their article wasn't too critical. Friendly tone, calmly worded, detailed, and made specific, well thought, constructive criticisms with suggested improvements.
Tom's example of a "well-loaded RedHat Linux server" doesn't quite cut it. Instead, look at a MINIMAL system, with just the absolute essentials. Count only what you need to survive. You don't define an OS by how many applications you install (and you certainly don't give weight to extra bytes), but by what is absolutely required.
Remove gcc and make and and tell me how far your system goes.
Tom, I say, put your coding where your mouth is and replace everything from the FSF and see how easy it is.
Linus has said that every single line from his original kernel has been replaced. NOTHING remains from the orignal. If you replaced all the FSF utilities, RMS would still deserve credit for making it possible in the first place.
More than just companies making $$$ off of MP3, *consumers* have an economic interest in keeping MP3 (or something free) around. It's called Supply AND Demand.
> why is everyone so freaked out about graphical UIs?
Probably for the same reason people liked the electric ignitions on their automobiles: it makes it easier to use, and you don't have to stand in the rain to start your car.
A GUI interface, on TOP of the everything else, is a win-win situation for everyone. The shells aren't going away and you'll always be able to run programs this way, but isn't it nice to have the option of a GUI?
> but i bet even Linus would agree that the commercialism springing up is making him sick.
Though shalt not take Linus' name in vain. But if you must, just how much are you willing to bet? Considering his current employment, I would really doubt that he's against commercialism.
If they break into your computer, are they not inherently tampering with any evidence they may find. How can they *prove* that you broke into other computers when you did not have control of the machine. It would be SO easy for them to plant evidence this way, and would be equally easy to claim real evidence found was in fact planted.
> If so many more people like Katz than hate him, where are they?
They're lurking. You don't honestly think that the majority of the readers bother posting, do you? I would guess that fear of rude responses is the #1 reason for that.
See also: Luring the Lurkers; http://www.slashdot.org/features/98/12/28/1745252. shtml
Warning, it's an article by Katz and so if you REALLY don't like him, don't bother to read it.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe Archie comics caved long before court action (something about bad publicity from suing a 1-year old baby). Since it was settled, no legal precedent was set.
> Lessening the amount of money to get that approval would, IMO, be a better way of "fixing" it.
The reason it costs so much is because of the all the testing done to "prove" that it works and to test the safety.
After the recent fen/fen (sp?) disaster, it seems unlikely that the FDA will seek to make drug approval any easier.
There is certainly a LOT of room for improvement with current IP legislation. The Patent Office clearly has issued some insane patents; the distributors seem to hold the copyright on music rather than the artists; the lifetime of an IT patent is insanely long for the modern world; the cost of litigation prevents challenges to IP; etc...
Any reform, however, has to face the modern political realities. The FSF foundation has made a difference because they didn't have to change any laws. But if you wanna take this revolution to Washington and abolish (or even lessen) IP, you'll have every large corporation on the planet against you...
Consider the drug DMSO. It's been around for a long time... so long that the patent has expired and anyone can produce it.
Since the patent expired, some researchers have found evidence that DMSO may be a cure for arthritis. However, any company that wanted to market DMSO as an arthritis cure would have to spend over $500 milion to get approval from the FDA... but they would NOT get patent protection. Once Company A spent all that money, anyone could then sell their generic brand.
I can't *prove* that this is the reason no one's bothered to spend the money to get it approved, but I have my suspicions.
How do you propose to create an empirical test to see if innovation will stop without IP? I can't think of any, short of abolishing it and see what happens.
> Why do you think the SEC exists in the U.S.?
The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was passed because the Rockefellers were trying to raise the costs for their competitors, the House of Morgan (see _Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics_, Vol 1, Issue 1, Spring 98).
The Interstate Commerce Commission was the first federal regulatory body. It was created at the behest of those that argued that the railroads were acting as a cartel and doing crazy things like charging different prices depending on destination! The ICC's job was to regulate prices. The first ICC commissioner (a former railroad lawyer) raised the discounted rates and, for the first time, the railroads were able to ENFORCE their cartel.
If greed is so evil, how do you keep the greedy from running for office?
Dred Scott doesn't seem like a plausible cause to me. The primary even leading to the war was *Southern* secession. Why would the South secede if they "won" the slavery issue in the Supreme Court?
Further, if the war *started* because of slavery, why wasn't the Emancipation Proclamation made *before* the South seceded? The war clearly became a war over slavery, and tensions over slavery can certainly be cited as reasons for the South feeling pressured, but Dred Scott looks like a battle the South won.
It costs millions to genetically engineer a new seed. If they didn't have IP protection, they'd never be able to regain their expenses...
What's the best way, short of the furnace, to securely erase an 8mm tape? Shred doesn't look like it's designed for that sorta thing...
I plan to go outside... once I get my wearable!
TealDoc (shareware with a 1 second nag and nothing crippled) for the Palm Pilot has an autoscroll function, and you can vary the speed. If your text is in HTML (which most bleeding edge tech stuff is), you should be able to convert to a DOC format.
Has MicroSoft said how much slower they think they'll be?
> but should we be criticizing a company ...
/.ers? They criticize EVERYTHING (after all, you're criticizing people for being to critical). Bruce et al? Their article wasn't too critical. Friendly tone, calmly worded, detailed, and made specific, well thought, constructive criticisms with suggested improvements.
We who?
> how much [...] did [RMS] actually right [sic]
He wants it called GNU/Linux, not RMS/Linux.
> If you wanted credit, it should have been a requirement in the GPL. Sheesh.
He's not suing anyone or forcing anyone to call it GNU/Linux, he's just stating his belief that the FSF deserves credit based on its accomplishments.
For all those who keep saying "freedom means I can call it what I want," it also means he RMS can ask for credit if he wants.
egcs: experimental GNU compiling system
At least they know how to give credit.
Tom's example of a "well-loaded RedHat Linux server" doesn't quite cut it. Instead, look at a MINIMAL system, with just the absolute essentials. Count only what you need to survive. You don't define an OS by how many applications you install (and you certainly don't give weight to extra bytes), but by what is absolutely required.
Remove gcc and make and and tell me how far your system goes.
Tom, I say, put your coding where your mouth is and replace everything from the FSF and see how easy it is.
Linus has said that every single line from his original kernel has been replaced. NOTHING remains from the orignal. If you replaced all the FSF utilities, RMS would still deserve credit for making it possible in the first place.
More than just companies making $$$ off of MP3, *consumers* have an economic interest in keeping MP3 (or something free) around. It's called Supply AND Demand.
Group 1: Fear
Group 2: Uncertainty
Group 3: Doubt
Group 4: Embrace and Extend
I tried to make a post, but I keep getting:
Error
The requested operation could not be performed by the proxy.
Document contains no data
Tried 6 times.
Stuck in the Middle with You
or
I Can't Get No Satisfaction
Speaking of the Stones, how come MicroSoft never played the rest of "Start Me Up": "You make a grown man cry".
From their site:
"It's pull-out removable, which is handy both for security and because to update the tunes you need to hook it up to your PC."
They even refer to being on slashdot last January on their home page.
According the the latest Debian Weekly News (http://www.debian.org/News/weekly/current/issue/) , it uses Debian gnu/linux.
> why is everyone so freaked out about graphical UIs?
Probably for the same reason people liked the electric ignitions on their automobiles: it makes it easier to use, and you don't have to stand in the rain to start your car.
A GUI interface, on TOP of the everything else, is a win-win situation for everyone. The shells aren't going away and you'll always be able to run programs this way, but isn't it nice to have the option of a GUI?
> but i bet even Linus would agree that the commercialism springing up is making him sick.
Though shalt not take Linus' name in vain. But if you must, just how much are you willing to bet? Considering his current employment, I would really doubt that he's against commercialism.
If they break into your computer, are they not inherently tampering with any evidence they may find. How can they *prove* that you broke into other computers when you did not have control of the machine. It would be SO easy for them to plant evidence this way, and would be equally easy to claim real evidence found was in fact planted.
Let me guess, you saw a video produced by MicroSoft that demonstrated this speedup?
> If so many more people like Katz than hate him, where are they?
. shtml
They're lurking. You don't honestly think that the majority of the readers bother posting, do you? I would guess that fear of rude responses is the #1 reason for that.
See also: Luring the Lurkers; http://www.slashdot.org/features/98/12/28/1745252
Warning, it's an article by Katz and so if you REALLY don't like him, don't bother to read it.