I think you have a lot of merit in your statement.
I wonder if anyone has tried to pass that around the occupiers? Even if it's just "make a demand to this group, and then stop buying from them until they leverage force as well".
Regarding TFS, I think I agree with you that Occupy, as it is, won't do much. However, they do have a point. As long as investors are trying to get high yields, there are only two options 1) Make money off of the growth of the economy 2) Make money off of "surplus" in less economically successful areas of the economy.
With the way the first is going, only #2 is left. With the low amount of surplus in #2, there is little profit to be seen. With little profit to be seen, there is little investment, with little investment, there is little growth and reduction into the surplus (and even the needed) capital in the less economically successful groups.
What we need to do is curb the profits given to the top 1%. We can do this by either by responsible pay to higher tiers, and paying less to lower tiers, or by getting the less wealthy to invest and gain more money. The latter doesn't work so well because the less wealthy don't necessarily have the surplus finance to invest...
With this, there would be more economic growth, more profit available from the market, long term, and even at reduced income percentages, the top tiers would probably be overall better off.
No, the idea behind reference frames is that they define a context in which the problem is viewed. No more, no less. Typically they are inertial (not accelerating), but that doesn't have to be the case.
Re:There's a "build tiny black hole" option
on
LHC Gets Android App
·
· Score: 1
How's it feel to be headless? Because I see you were just decapitated by the low flying *wooooosh!*
But Ender had this foisted upon him. The question is - what if this kid does not want what Ender wants. Foisting "just being a kid" on him, is just as bad as foisting "not just being a kid" on him.
I think most private systems would be just as detrimental. Most private schools seem less tolerant of non-conformists than public schools. As other suggested - that's college level material that people 5-10 years older than him are studying, and usually only one or two of the topics, not all those listed. The kid needs to be in college for eduction.
For socialization, find local clubs for kids and kids activities. Maybe a sport. Hell, even a church, though caution is needed with that - In my experience, kids who's only socialization is though church groups, tend to be pretty fucked up.
Personally I agree with RMS (for once, must be a layer of frost in hell). I too, am not happy to see Jobs dead, however, I believe he has had a lot of negative influences in the business world of computers. I am very glad to see his influences there removed, and I hope the results of his actions are diminished with time. However, countering that - he has also had many great influences, and I hope those stand the test of time. I hope that in 20 years, unbiased individuals can look at the changes he made and say "that is a man who made computers better than they would have otherwise been." without having to add ", but damn did he fuck up the way computer companies act."
Loyalty is a consideration - but first comes paying the bills. Are you happy and satisfied with where you work, and your style of living? Would the 7k increase be worth it for you, to switch, and leave them where they are? Company is about risks and resources, if they don't manage their resources and take a risk at loosing something that is important and even key to what they are doing, it is their problem, not yours.
They check the desired price, come to an agreement, and pay it, as with any other proprietary solution. They don't have to release their code open source, so they can keep modifications under their hats if they want, but they do get the benefit of back-ported OSS softwawre. In other words, they pay as they would proprietary software, but they get some extra developmental effort as well, and don't need to release their source if they don't want to.
Yes, you can make money with the GPL, even if you can't make closed source derivatives.
Personally, I want a license that says: - If you release your derivative open source, changes made in the derivative can be back-ported to the original project, without modification of the original project license - If you release the derived work for compensation (either of the derived work or related services), you must make an agreement with the original to properly compensate the original author/project team.
This means that you fairly compensate the original team, but can release your derived work with whatever mechanism you like (closed or open source, for or without compensation).
But if you aren't going to maintain it yourself, why make that choice for the future maintainer? Leave the option up to them. Especially since the reverse change is a lot harder to manage.
He did a lot of good for the computing world, but he did a lot of bad too.
For the good, he revolutionized very little, but he took mediocrity and gave it polish, making the products useful to the non tech geek. Prior to his work with Apple...... Personal computers were glorified gaming consoles and maybe word processors. He didn't invent the market segment, but he did make it more available to the masses.... Portable digital music players were available, but didn't have the convenience, simplicity, and visual polish for the average user, he jumped into the market with one and turned it on it's head.... Smartphones had been available for a while before the iPhone - definitely Blackberry, and maybe even Palm and Windows CE. However, none of these had the appearance and "pretty" factor most users would want in such a device. His leadership gave them this.... Tablet computers had been available for most of a decade before the iPad. They used clumsy conversions from a desktop-metaphore to touchscreen interface. With the iPad, the device started out with a touchscreen oriented interface, making them more 'natural' to use.
Conversely, he was also a paragon of hype, cult and marketing, convincing people that something was better than it was, and making that stick (my suspicion is use of cognitive dissonance, but I'm not sure).
He did good, he did bad. Everyone does, he was just bigger at both than most. Even if he didn't invent all that he touched as many would claim, he did make the most noticeable differences in getting these things into the hands of normal users.
May his improvements and good influence have a lasting effect on the technology sector. May his harmful influences fade.
There are plenty of people who use a keyboard and a GUI.
The nice thing about a GUI, is it tends to provide a more two-dimensional (rather than one dimensional) interface compared to a command line, and the display tends to be visually smoother/cleaner (unless idiots get in and try to make it overly flashy, detracting from function) and tends to be designed to provide better prompts for users.
However, I tend to very quickly reorganize my start menu from 'program' and 'developer' level entries (blizzzard, visual studios, microsoft office, foxit...), to application type entries (games, internet, multimedia...).
That's one amazing thing about the start menu, it's ability to be organized. Well, prior to vista/7, they kinda screwed the pooch in that upgrade. It can still be reorganized, but not as easy as it was in the 95-XP era.
I can't really blame the start menu for developers having bad defaults.
I can blame MS for making it difficult to have a quick launch bar that isn't part of the task bar. That actually over doubled my reliance on the start menu.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you have a lot of merit in your statement.
I wonder if anyone has tried to pass that around the occupiers? Even if it's just "make a demand to this group, and then stop buying from them until they leverage force as well".
Regarding TFS, I think I agree with you that Occupy, as it is, won't do much. However, they do have a point. As long as investors are trying to get high yields, there are only two options
1) Make money off of the growth of the economy
2) Make money off of "surplus" in less economically successful areas of the economy.
With the way the first is going, only #2 is left. With the low amount of surplus in #2, there is little profit to be seen. With little profit to be seen, there is little investment, with little investment, there is little growth and reduction into the surplus (and even the needed) capital in the less economically successful groups.
What we need to do is curb the profits given to the top 1%. We can do this by either by responsible pay to higher tiers, and paying less to lower tiers, or by getting the less wealthy to invest and gain more money. The latter doesn't work so well because the less wealthy don't necessarily have the surplus finance to invest...
With this, there would be more economic growth, more profit available from the market, long term, and even at reduced income percentages, the top tiers would probably be overall better off.
No, the idea behind reference frames is that they define a context in which the problem is viewed. No more, no less. Typically they are inertial (not accelerating), but that doesn't have to be the case.
How's it feel to be headless? Because I see you were just decapitated by the low flying *wooooosh!*
But Ender had this foisted upon him. The question is - what if this kid does not want what Ender wants. Foisting "just being a kid" on him, is just as bad as foisting "not just being a kid" on him.
I think most private systems would be just as detrimental. Most private schools seem less tolerant of non-conformists than public schools. As other suggested - that's college level material that people 5-10 years older than him are studying, and usually only one or two of the topics, not all those listed. The kid needs to be in college for eduction.
For socialization, find local clubs for kids and kids activities. Maybe a sport. Hell, even a church, though caution is needed with that - In my experience, kids who's only socialization is though church groups, tend to be pretty fucked up.
Yes. So wouldn't the answer to the TFS be "as a professor"
Seriously? He said he was not glad Jobs is dead.
Personally I agree with RMS (for once, must be a layer of frost in hell). I too, am not happy to see Jobs dead, however, I believe he has had a lot of negative influences in the business world of computers. I am very glad to see his influences there removed, and I hope the results of his actions are diminished with time. However, countering that - he has also had many great influences, and I hope those stand the test of time. I hope that in 20 years, unbiased individuals can look at the changes he made and say "that is a man who made computers better than they would have otherwise been." without having to add ", but damn did he fuck up the way computer companies act."
Only in reference frames travelling faster than the speed of light, with respect to our reference frame.
If you want. Personally, I think it sucks.
Ask for a raise, see if you get it.
Loyalty is a consideration - but first comes paying the bills. Are you happy and satisfied with where you work, and your style of living? Would the 7k increase be worth it for you, to switch, and leave them where they are? Company is about risks and resources, if they don't manage their resources and take a risk at loosing something that is important and even key to what they are doing, it is their problem, not yours.
Why would it scare off any commercial company?
They check the desired price, come to an agreement, and pay it, as with any other proprietary solution. They don't have to release their code open source, so they can keep modifications under their hats if they want, but they do get the benefit of back-ported OSS softwawre. In other words, they pay as they would proprietary software, but they get some extra developmental effort as well, and don't need to release their source if they don't want to.
Each side contributes as each side recieves.
MySQL
RedHat
etc.
Yes, you can make money with the GPL, even if you can't make closed source derivatives.
Personally, I want a license that says:
- If you release your derivative open source, changes made in the derivative can be back-ported to the original project, without modification of the original project license
- If you release the derived work for compensation (either of the derived work or related services), you must make an agreement with the original to properly compensate the original author/project team.
This means that you fairly compensate the original team, but can release your derived work with whatever mechanism you like (closed or open source, for or without compensation).
But if you aren't going to maintain it yourself, why make that choice for the future maintainer? Leave the option up to them. Especially since the reverse change is a lot harder to manage.
So, the new maintainer can maintain a fork, have the original mention the fork as the successor application, and GPL the fork.
Not a challenge.
No, you can sublicense it.
If you don't want to continue the project as BSD, you *can* make a GPL fork.
But many GPL trolls seem to think the ability to make closed source derivative works, somehow prevents this.
GPL it? Why? Maybe let the new maintainer decide, rather than deciding for them?
He did a lot of good for the computing world, but he did a lot of bad too.
For the good, he revolutionized very little, but he took mediocrity and gave it polish, making the products useful to the non tech geek. ... Personal computers were glorified gaming consoles and maybe word processors. He didn't invent the market segment, but he did make it more available to the masses. ... Portable digital music players were available, but didn't have the convenience, simplicity, and visual polish for the average user, he jumped into the market with one and turned it on it's head. ... Smartphones had been available for a while before the iPhone - definitely Blackberry, and maybe even Palm and Windows CE. However, none of these had the appearance and "pretty" factor most users would want in such a device. His leadership gave them this. ... Tablet computers had been available for most of a decade before the iPad. They used clumsy conversions from a desktop-metaphore to touchscreen interface. With the iPad, the device started out with a touchscreen oriented interface, making them more 'natural' to use.
Prior to his work with Apple...
Conversely, he was also a paragon of hype, cult and marketing, convincing people that something was better than it was, and making that stick (my suspicion is use of cognitive dissonance, but I'm not sure).
He did good, he did bad. Everyone does, he was just bigger at both than most. Even if he didn't invent all that he touched as many would claim, he did make the most noticeable differences in getting these things into the hands of normal users.
May his improvements and good influence have a lasting effect on the technology sector. May his harmful influences fade.
Yeah, were you saying that when Apple did the same thing to Samsung?
Both suits are garbage, but I hope Apple gets to taste some of their own medicine here.
Hey, in Texas, that beer will KEEP you from getting a ticket.
Oh wait, TFS isn't about Texas.
Better yet, cover it in the blood of your enemies!
There are plenty of people who use a keyboard and a GUI.
The nice thing about a GUI, is it tends to provide a more two-dimensional (rather than one dimensional) interface compared to a command line, and the display tends to be visually smoother/cleaner (unless idiots get in and try to make it overly flashy, detracting from function) and tends to be designed to provide better prompts for users.
BY default, yes.
However, I tend to very quickly reorganize my start menu from 'program' and 'developer' level entries (blizzzard, visual studios, microsoft office, foxit...), to application type entries (games, internet, multimedia...).
That's one amazing thing about the start menu, it's ability to be organized. Well, prior to vista/7, they kinda screwed the pooch in that upgrade. It can still be reorganized, but not as easy as it was in the 95-XP era.
I can't really blame the start menu for developers having bad defaults.
I can blame MS for making it difficult to have a quick launch bar that isn't part of the task bar. That actually over doubled my reliance on the start menu.
With windows remove a quicklaunch that was detachable from the task bar, WIndows Vista/7 have actually increased my use of the start Menu.
I suspect a browser plugin wouldn't be too bad to find/write.
Good names:
"CookieSwaper"
"MixedNutCookies"
And why would linux being ideal for a low end phone also preclude it from being good on a high-end phone?