That model hasn't worked. They're hardly making anything off iTunes.
It's all of the iPods Apple is selling as a result that is what's making it work for them.
Arguing that the model isn't working because Apple isn't making any money off iTunes is like arguing that the DVD model isn't working because Best Buy isn't making anything off DVD sales (which may be true considering how much they discount).
Guess what? The model works. In the latter case, Best Buy makes money because as long as you're in the store to buy the $9.99 DVD on sale, you pick up some blank CDs, a new pair of headphones, a monster cable, or something else with much higher markup. But the movie company still makes plenty of money off the DVD. Everybody wins.
Same with iTunes. The model works. Apple attracts customers with the music store, and makes a profit by selling iPods. They don't lose money on everyone else, they just don't make a lot of profit. But the recording companies and artists make plenty of money. And remember, they're not all evil - just the RIAA. Apple has hundreds of thousands of songs from non-RIAA labels now.
The RIAA may be doomed, but legal online music downloading is here to stay.
I already posted this above, but it needs repeating.
Not all music labels are members of the RIAA. Just the big ones. Lots of great artists are signed with independent labels, many of those labels don't screw their artists, and many of those good independent labels are on iTunes.
Wondering whether your favorite band is RIAA-free or not? Click here...
The problem with Itunes is it takes the flawed recording industry and extends their monopoly.
Guess what? The iTunes Music Store has hundreds of thousands of songs from independent labels. Labels that are not members of the RIAA. Including many labels that give their artists much better deals.
I'm a jazz fan, so one of my favorite labels is Concord Records, with such artists as Poncho Sanchez and Karrin Allyson. Go ahead, log on and listen to them, you might enjoy it. And supporting them doesn't support the RIAA!
RIAA Radar is a neat site that lets you search for your favorite artist or label and find out whether they're RIAA-free or not.
Here's a silly question: on an ILP64 system like a Cray (and also an Alpha, if I remember correctly), how do you get a 32-bit int?
I mean, I'm sure that one of the header files defines int32_t, but what does that turn into? There should be some C-native name that corresponds to a 32-bit int, right?
I do consulting for several clients that take CCs over the net. A typical example of CC/gateway costs is 2.25% +.30 per transaction. So a.32 of a $1.00 charge is immediately taken by the CC company. The numbers vary a bit, and are lower with larger volumes, but at a minimum they're problably paying 1.25% +.20/transaction.
Apple has billions of dollars in sales a year. That's right, billions with a 'b'. I'm certain Apple is paying nowhere close to 20 cents per transaction.
I suspect very few people buy songs 1 at a time -- gift certificates are $20. I personally buy about 5 songs at a time, but friends of mine might buy 1-2 albums at a time, which minimizes the bite of the transaction fees.
I've purchased about 100 songs on iTunes so far, and at least a dozen of those were individual, i.e. I only bought one song that day. Apple waits 1-3 days before billing you, probably trying to consolidate multiple purchases, but they've billed me $0.99 quite a few times now.
Just as a sidenote... does anyone have any suggestions as far as carriers that you've noticed that have above average coverage? Or customer support?
Get a T-mobile plan with free nationwide roaming. I have T-mobile, but 90% of the time my phone uses the Cingular network because it has better coverage in my area. Best of both worlds!
IMHO, each project should create a group devoted to end-user focus. That group should work on marketing, and viewing the product through an enduser perspective... not a Geek perspective. And judge if it's end user friendly.
Thanks for volunteering! Which projects are you going to found the end-user focus group for?
The other problem with OSS is lack of innovation. How many things does the OSS community go about attempting to clone only after someone like MS or another company introduced it? Was there a FreeMware before VMware? Was there Linux PVR applications before Tivo? etc.
The presence of copying commercial software products doesn't indicate the lack of innovation.
Earlier you mentioned that Linux is missing Tax software. So, which way do you want it? Do you want someone to create something similar to TurboTax, or create something innovative? You can't have it both ways.
Aha, you say - OSS developers should write innovative tax software! Yeah, right. If somebody created software that did everything the average taxpayer needed, everyone would immediately start comparing it to TurboTax (and the other commercial offerings). In many ways the OSS program would have no choice but to "clone" the commercial programs, because there's no other logical way to do things.
There are thousands of innovative OSS programs that are incredibly innovative, that have no parallel in the commercial world. Here are a few off the top of my head:
1. Audacity - shameless plug, this is my audio editor. It's not a rip-off of CoolEdit or Sound Forge. Of course it looks similar in some superficial ways - they're all audio editors. But Audacity has dozens of innovative, unique features, like an integrated envelope editor, automatic real-time resampling when tracks are at different sample rates, three different types of sample-level editing, etc.
2. BitTorrent - robust, P2P way to speed up everyone's download speed simultaneously. And yes, it's primarily used for legitimate downloads, imagine that.
3. GAIM - aha, you say, just another instant messanger! What's innovative here is that it's the only instant messenger to support AIM, ICQ, Yahoo!, MSN, Jabber, IRC, Napster, Gadu-Gadu, Zephyr, and more...which is incredible if you have lots of friends you want to IM and they all use different systems.
4. Gallery - program that runs on your webserver that makes it fun and easy to upload pictures for everyone to see. Right from the web interface, you can categorize, show slideshows, etc.
I'm not even listing the thousands of innovative programs that OSS developers have come up with that are primarily of benefit to other developers.
Why not search the Sourceforge and Freshmeat top 100 lists for new programs? I think you'll discover lots of innovation.
The cost for repairing an iPod is $250, however if the battery is the only problem it costs $100. So either:
1. There was something wrong with the iPod other than the battery (maybe it fell our of their pocket one too many times?)
2. Or, the tech support rep from Apple goofed and forgot that battery service is cheaper. Heck, not all of the Apple tech support reps can be stellar. If you don't like what you hear, call back.
How many people here are employed by companies doing software development? How many people here are PAID to develop software? How can any of you, in your right mind, even consider supporting the concept of "free" software? ALL software costs money, but in the case of "open source" or "free" software, the cost of the development is bourne by governments and corporations indirectly, instead of directly through paying actual developers. SCO is defending our RIGHT to create proprietary, closed source software. Apple and Microsoft are two examples of companies that simply could not exist if the notion of "open source" were dominant today. How much of our GDP is generated by these two companies alone? Are you all willing to give that up in your quest to destroy a 30+ year old profession?
Please, everyone, THINK before you go throwing your support behind a concept which is, in its most basic form, designed to undermine our fundamental rights and values.
I know, do not feed the trolls. But this is important.
1. Most of the programmers in the U.S. are not employed by Apple or Microsoft. Between them they employ maybe 50,000 programmers (probably less). There are 1 million programmers in the U.S., and they don't benefit from the fact that Microsoft made more than a billion dollars in profit last year (and by the way, paid no taxes). For programmers outside the U.S. it makes even more sense to support open-source development instead of commercial software, to keep more of the capital inside the country.
2. The vast majority of programmers, even at Apple and Microsoft, do not have any significant amount of stock, nor do they get a royalty every time one of their software programs is sold. Spending $400 on a brand-new copy of Microsoft Office doesn't help put food on the table of Microsoft's programmers, it helps put cash in the bank that they use to buy up small companies.
3. Free software developers are not trying to take away SCO's right to create proprietary, closed source software. On the contrary, SCO is trying to take away the right of Linux developers to create open-source software.
I'm employed full-time as a software developer. Sometimes my organization lets me develop free / open-source software, when that makes sense for the application - for example, sometimes it's faster and cheaper to modify an existing open-source program than it is to create something new from scratch or build off of a proprietary program.
I also develop free software on the side. Because I like to. It isn't eliminating jobs, it's making me more employable.
If there is SCO code inside of Linux, of course it should be removed. And whoever copied it there should be held liable. But that shouldn't affect everyone else - the thousands of innocent developers who have contributed to Linux legitimately.
That's true in that music has probably had percussion since the start, other then that, total rubbish.
What about music from other cultures? Totally different scales, numbers of notes, structure, the works. You gonna tell a billion Indian's their taste in music is mathematically wrong?
Music is almost 100% relative. It's about painting a psycho acoustic picture inside the listener. Why do certain sounds feel aggressive, well others are soulful? It's 99% arbitrary.
Actually melodies, harmonies, and rhythm from different cultures all around the world are remarkably similar. Of course there are many aspects of a culture's musical taste that are quite arbitrary, but it's not 99%.
Let's take your example of Indian music, which you claim has "totally different scales, number of notes",... - it's true that a lot of Indian music is based on a 24-tone scale, instead of the 12-tone scale in Western music. But first of all, half of those tones are in common (Indians just inserted an additional note between each of ours), and in reality, Indian melodies use mostly the same tones that we do, with only occasional notes that aren't in our scale.
There are certain well-accepted universals in music perception. Everyone in the world recognizes that two notes an octave apart are very similar; it sounds to everyone as if the two notes are really just two different shades of the same note. That's because note at 440 Hz is also periodic with a frequency of 220 Hz (and 110 Hz, etc.), so our ears hear an element of a 220-Hz note in the 440-Hz note. There are simple and compelling mathematical reasons why a perfect fifth, perfect fourth, and major third are also found throughout musical cultures (in short, because they're based on 3:2, 4:3, and 5:4 ratios, respectively, and this creates the simplest possible patterns when you combine two waveforms).
Arguing that music is 100% relative is like trying to argue that art is 100% relative. Of course people's taste in art varies widely - but there are lots of universals. Perfect circles, and perfect squares tend to be universally pleasing. Anything that resembles the human form is universally pleasing (in music, any instrument that resembles the human voice in some way tends to be more universally pleasing than an instrument that is mostly unlike the voice). As a general rule, orange and red are associated with warmth, while blue and purple are associated with coolness. There are similar associations in music.
Remember that we're all human beings - we're all born with the same eyes, same ears, and very similar brains, and we all live on the same planet. Just like the nature/nurture argument, I think that the truth is probably that musical and artistic taste are a pretty even balance of nature (universals) and culture.
What I would suggest as a compromise, is this: if a work can be compiled with free tools, then other parties (other than the original copyright holder) should not be allowed to distribute derivative works that require proprietary tools for compilation.
That seems silly too. What if somebody ported my GPL'd Linux program to Windows, using the most common compiler on that platform, Microsoft's Visual C++, and in the process they added one new small feature. You're saying they wouldn't be allowed to release the modified code under the GPL because now it requires VC++? I would much rather that they release the code; I can always port it back to Linux later if I want.
Because I just bought a 17" iMac less than a month ago. Apple always upgrades boxes a month after I buy them.
From now on you should bookmark the MacRumors buyer's guide - they tend to be pretty accurate as to what you should and shouldn't buy if you want to get the best deal. For example, right now you should avoid buying xServes and Apple LCDs, since they're both overdue for an upgrade.
The currently Apple 20" flatscreen goes for $1299. You're paying $2199 for that attached to a 1.25GHz iMac... So in 3 years when the iMac is obsolete and the monitor is running fine, you can't attach that 20" flatscreen to anything. Hmm. Not good.
Three years ago the most expensive iMac was a $1500 iMac DV Special Edition, with a 500 MHz G3 and a DVD-ROM drive. Today, that iMac sells for ~$420 on eBay. Plus that machine would run Mac OS X 10.3 "Panther" just fine, so I'd hardly call it obsolete. I wouldn't call a Mac obsolete until it's 5 or 6 years old at least, but believe it or not, you'll still get cash for it on eBay.
Don't take this the wrong way, Gnuites, but I wish they hadn't gone for putting RS up on the stand...
RS is an idealist, and I honour him for his ideals, but idealism has no place in a courtroom, pragmatism is the rule of law.
Are you kidding? I understand your concerns -- RMS comes across as a total wacko -- but this is the guy who invented the GPL! I think he understands better than most people exactly why free software is on solid legal ground, so I think he'd be a fine person on the witness stand. No judge will have a hard time believing that the last thing in the world he would ever want to do would be to steal somebody else's source code and release it for free. He'd sooner rewrite it from scratch, as he's done hundreds of times before.
...How about we stop expecting portable electronics to be as powerful as non-portable electronics?...No, and by that I mean zero, laptops need a DVD-R. Almost no laptops need any 3D accelerator.
OK, even if I agreed that all of those things are not necessary in portable electronics, there's one thing that's totally critical in portable electronics and also a huge power drain: wireless communications. Trust me, it's not the camera in the cell phone that's wasting your battery, it's the transmitting.
The "killer feature" of laptops isn't a built-in DVD-R or a 3-D accelerator. It's 802.11 - and that uses a lot of power.
Any job which requires no creativity (for want of a less fuzzy word) can be done by a computer without any human intervention. For example, if you are simply entering data and running programs A, B and C, a better system could enter the data and run the programs without you.
I would say that any worker using a computer who can do his job without doing ANY programming could be replaced by a slightly better program than the one he is ``operating''. The only exceptions would be people doing jobs which are wholly creative, and could be done without a computer at all (e.g., writers, who could use pencil and paper).
Um, whatever. More and more jobs are in the service sector. That doesn't necessarily mean unskilled at all. Various forms of sales reps, counselors, attendants, personal trainers, chefs, waiters, etc - none of those jobs will ever be replaced by computers! Computers are getting rid of the boring jobs so that people can get jobs working with people!
The article was stupid. Most people don't need to know how to program, just like most people don't need to know algebra. I'm sure that programming will eventually be a normal part of high school, just like algebra, but you're learning it for the experience, not because you'll actually use it in your career.
High-quality digital recordings on a MP3 player? You have to be kidding, you will probably use a feature like that maybe once or twice in your life unless you are a professional and then you will probably have dedicated equipment that is way better than any MP3 player.
But what about the millions of amateur musicians out there? I would LOVE to have a device that I can take to an informal gig or jam session and make a decent-sounding recording, and then transfer it to my computer later. Right now I use a Sony Minidisc recorder, but you're limited to just a couple hours per disc if you want any sort of quality, and then you have to do an analog transfer of the audio to your computer later! Almost defeats the purpose of recording it digitally in the first place.
I was really hoping that the new iPods would record 44 KHz 16-bit audio from any line in, but alas, it looks like it's just voice quality. Quite a bummer. I'm definitely looking into some of those other devices.
Lots of people have responded with various ways to contact Microsoft, but the fact is that they get lots of junk, and as a result they miss out on a lot of interesting, useful mail people are sending them because the people they've hired to sort through their mail don't know what they're talking about.
How else do you explain that so many security researchers say that their emails to Microsoft were never returned?
I think that the real issue here is that it's impossible to contact anyone important at a large company like Microsoft. Suppose I discovered that one of their domains just expired, or I found a new security hole in IE, or found out the identity of someone inside Microsoft who had been "leaking" builds of Longhorn, or something like that. What do I do? All of their public telephone numbers and email addresses get routed to minimum-wage drones who wouldn't understand what I'm talking about, much less even have the authority to contact somebody who does.
In the specific case of security holes, Microsoft has repeatedly complained when people publish exploits without contacting them first, and yet in many cases the researcher who found the problem had been trying to contact Microsoft for weeks without getting any response.
I suppose the best way I could think of might be to send email to individual Microsoft employees I know of who might be willing to listen - there are some who post regularly to public newsgroups and mailing lists (and even Slashdot!) and one of them might pay attention. But how long would it take them to figure out who to contact to fix the problem?
Not that it's better in many other large companies. Anyone know of any large corporations where they're actually handling this well?
That did not work either. Still 2 out of 10 results not containing the phrase.
On bug result is has only "2Bee or Nottoobee", the other just has "to be" in it.
I agree that it would be nice occasionally to have Google just act as a "dumb" search engine, just returning pages that actually contain the phrase I selected and nothing else, but the fact is that every single one of the pages returned did have that exact phrase, or else it had something which is clearly an allusion to that line. And who's to say that an allusion to that line isn't exactly what somebody was looking for?
Here's the thing: a dumb search engine would ONLY return pages that contain that phrase. Google returns all of the pages that contain that phrase, PLUS other pages that contain something relevant or related to that phrase. Then it ranks all of those pages, and 2 of the top 10 turned out not to have the entire phrase.
...when they're making the kind of money even Google makes? The two founders of Google must be making several million dollars a year (if Google's profits of $150M a year are accurate).
I'd collect $10-20 and then go find something *interesting* to do. I'm sure running google would be interesting, but there's a whole huge world out there to be enjoyed, and $20M would make it very interesting indeed.
I don't think you truly appreciate just how interesting working at Google is to a hard-core computer scientist. Just imagine being surrounded by three hundred of the best computer scientists in the world (they have more Ph.D.'s than many small liberal arts colleges), terabytes worth of interesting data to mine through and test new algorithms on, virtually unlimited computer power to test your ideas, hundreds of interesting new problems to solve (look at Google Labs to see some of the things they're working on), a work environment with many of the frills of the dot-com era, minus the lack of a business plan, PLUS the thrill of working for a company that is very well-known and very popular?
The employees at Google are making very good salaries and they're having a blast. Of course some of them would like to have a shot at more money, but I think that the vast majority of them would be happy to spend the rest of their careers at Google even if they never IPO.
Slashdot Mirror
That model hasn't worked. They're hardly making anything off iTunes.
It's all of the iPods Apple is selling as a result that is what's making it work for them.
Arguing that the model isn't working because Apple isn't making any money off iTunes is like arguing that the DVD model isn't working because Best Buy isn't making anything off DVD sales (which may be true considering how much they discount).
Guess what? The model works. In the latter case, Best Buy makes money because as long as you're in the store to buy the $9.99 DVD on sale, you pick up some blank CDs, a new pair of headphones, a monster cable, or something else with much higher markup. But the movie company still makes plenty of money off the DVD. Everybody wins.
Same with iTunes. The model works. Apple attracts customers with the music store, and makes a profit by selling iPods. They don't lose money on everyone else, they just don't make a lot of profit. But the recording companies and artists make plenty of money. And remember, they're not all evil - just the RIAA. Apple has hundreds of thousands of songs from non-RIAA labels now.
The RIAA may be doomed, but legal online music downloading is here to stay.
I already posted this above, but it needs repeating.
Not all music labels are members of the RIAA. Just the big ones. Lots of great artists are signed with independent labels, many of those labels don't screw their artists, and many of those good independent labels are on iTunes.
Wondering whether your favorite band is RIAA-free or not? Click here...
The problem with Itunes is it takes the flawed recording industry and extends their monopoly.
Guess what? The iTunes Music Store has hundreds of thousands of songs from independent labels. Labels that are not members of the RIAA. Including many labels that give their artists much better deals.
I'm a jazz fan, so one of my favorite labels is Concord Records, with such artists as Poncho Sanchez and Karrin Allyson. Go ahead, log on and listen to them, you might enjoy it. And supporting them doesn't support the RIAA!
RIAA Radar is a neat site that lets you search for your favorite artist or label and find out whether they're RIAA-free or not.
Here's a silly question: on an ILP64 system like a Cray (and also an Alpha, if I remember correctly), how do you get a 32-bit int?
I mean, I'm sure that one of the header files defines int32_t, but what does that turn into? There should be some C-native name that corresponds to a 32-bit int, right?
I do consulting for several clients that take CCs over the net. A typical example of CC/gateway costs is 2.25% + .30 per transaction. So a .32 of a $1.00 charge is immediately taken by the CC company. The numbers vary a bit, and are lower with larger volumes, but at a minimum they're problably paying 1.25% + .20/transaction.
Apple has billions of dollars in sales a year. That's right, billions with a 'b'. I'm certain Apple is paying nowhere close to 20 cents per transaction.
I suspect very few people buy songs 1 at a time -- gift certificates are $20. I personally buy about 5 songs at a time, but friends of mine might buy 1-2 albums at a time, which minimizes the bite of the transaction fees.
I've purchased about 100 songs on iTunes so far, and at least a dozen of those were individual, i.e. I only bought one song that day. Apple waits 1-3 days before billing you, probably trying to consolidate multiple purchases, but they've billed me $0.99 quite a few times now.
(Call) Mr. Plow.
That's my name!
That name again is Mr. Plow.
Just as a sidenote... does anyone have any suggestions as far as carriers that you've noticed that have above average coverage? Or customer support?
Get a T-mobile plan with free nationwide roaming. I have T-mobile, but 90% of the time my phone uses the Cingular network because it has better coverage in my area. Best of both worlds!
IMHO, each project should create a group devoted to end-user focus. That group should work on marketing, and viewing the product through an enduser perspective... not a Geek perspective. And judge if it's end user friendly.
Thanks for volunteering! Which projects are you going to found the end-user focus group for?
The other problem with OSS is lack of innovation. How many things does the OSS community go about attempting to clone only after someone like MS or another company introduced it? Was there a FreeMware before VMware? Was there Linux PVR applications before Tivo? etc.
The presence of copying commercial software products doesn't indicate the lack of innovation.
Earlier you mentioned that Linux is missing Tax software. So, which way do you want it? Do you want someone to create something similar to TurboTax, or create something innovative? You can't have it both ways.
Aha, you say - OSS developers should write innovative tax software! Yeah, right. If somebody created software that did everything the average taxpayer needed, everyone would immediately start comparing it to TurboTax (and the other commercial offerings). In many ways the OSS program would have no choice but to "clone" the commercial programs, because there's no other logical way to do things.
There are thousands of innovative OSS programs that are incredibly innovative, that have no parallel in the commercial world. Here are a few off the top of my head:
1. Audacity - shameless plug, this is my audio editor. It's not a rip-off of CoolEdit or Sound Forge. Of course it looks similar in some superficial ways - they're all audio editors. But Audacity has dozens of innovative, unique features, like an integrated envelope editor, automatic real-time resampling when tracks are at different sample rates, three different types of sample-level editing, etc.
2. BitTorrent - robust, P2P way to speed up everyone's download speed simultaneously. And yes, it's primarily used for legitimate downloads, imagine that.
3. GAIM - aha, you say, just another instant messanger! What's innovative here is that it's the only instant messenger to support AIM, ICQ, Yahoo!, MSN, Jabber, IRC, Napster, Gadu-Gadu, Zephyr, and more...which is incredible if you have lots of friends you want to IM and they all use different systems.
4. Gallery - program that runs on your webserver that makes it fun and easy to upload pictures for everyone to see. Right from the web interface, you can categorize, show slideshows, etc.
I'm not even listing the thousands of innovative programs that OSS developers have come up with that are primarily of benefit to other developers.
Why not search the Sourceforge and Freshmeat top 100 lists for new programs? I think you'll discover lots of innovation.
The cost for repairing an iPod is $250, however if the battery is the only problem it costs $100. So either:
1. There was something wrong with the iPod other than the battery (maybe it fell our of their pocket one too many times?)
2. Or, the tech support rep from Apple goofed and forgot that battery service is cheaper. Heck, not all of the Apple tech support reps can be stellar. If you don't like what you hear, call back.
How do I make my bed?
./configure
cd bed
make
How do I brush my teeth?
With the greatest invention of all time.
How do I dress myself?
this->Dress();
What do other Slashdotters use that roll of paper next to every toilet for?
make clean
How many people here are employed by companies doing software development? How many people here are PAID to develop software? How can any of you, in your right mind, even consider supporting the concept of "free" software? ALL software costs money, but in the case of "open source" or "free" software, the cost of the development is bourne by governments and corporations indirectly, instead of directly through paying actual developers. SCO is defending our RIGHT to create proprietary, closed source software. Apple and Microsoft are two examples of companies that simply could not exist if the notion of "open source" were dominant today. How much of our GDP is generated by these two companies alone? Are you all willing to give that up in your quest to destroy a 30+ year old profession?
Please, everyone, THINK before you go throwing your support behind a concept which is, in its most basic form, designed to undermine our fundamental rights and values.
I know, do not feed the trolls. But this is important.
1. Most of the programmers in the U.S. are not employed by Apple or Microsoft. Between them they employ maybe 50,000 programmers (probably less). There are 1 million programmers in the U.S., and they don't benefit from the fact that Microsoft made more than a billion dollars in profit last year (and by the way, paid no taxes). For programmers outside the U.S. it makes even more sense to support open-source development instead of commercial software, to keep more of the capital inside the country.
2. The vast majority of programmers, even at Apple and Microsoft, do not have any significant amount of stock, nor do they get a royalty every time one of their software programs is sold. Spending $400 on a brand-new copy of Microsoft Office doesn't help put food on the table of Microsoft's programmers, it helps put cash in the bank that they use to buy up small companies.
3. Free software developers are not trying to take away SCO's right to create proprietary, closed source software. On the contrary, SCO is trying to take away the right of Linux developers to create open-source software.
I'm employed full-time as a software developer. Sometimes my organization lets me develop free / open-source software, when that makes sense for the application - for example, sometimes it's faster and cheaper to modify an existing open-source program than it is to create something new from scratch or build off of a proprietary program.
I also develop free software on the side. Because I like to. It isn't eliminating jobs, it's making me more employable.
If there is SCO code inside of Linux, of course it should be removed. And whoever copied it there should be held liable. But that shouldn't affect everyone else - the thousands of innocent developers who have contributed to Linux legitimately.
That's true in that music has probably had percussion since the start, other then that, total rubbish.
... - it's true that a lot of Indian music is based on a 24-tone scale, instead of the 12-tone scale in Western music. But first of all, half of those tones are in common (Indians just inserted an additional note between each of ours), and in reality, Indian melodies use mostly the same tones that we do, with only occasional notes that aren't in our scale.
What about music from other cultures? Totally different scales, numbers of notes, structure, the works. You gonna tell a billion Indian's their taste in music is mathematically wrong?
Music is almost 100% relative. It's about painting a psycho acoustic picture inside the listener. Why do certain sounds feel aggressive, well others are soulful? It's 99% arbitrary.
Actually melodies, harmonies, and rhythm from different cultures all around the world are remarkably similar. Of course there are many aspects of a culture's musical taste that are quite arbitrary, but it's not 99%.
Let's take your example of Indian music, which you claim has "totally different scales, number of notes",
There are certain well-accepted universals in music perception. Everyone in the world recognizes that two notes an octave apart are very similar; it sounds to everyone as if the two notes are really just two different shades of the same note. That's because note at 440 Hz is also periodic with a frequency of 220 Hz (and 110 Hz, etc.), so our ears hear an element of a 220-Hz note in the 440-Hz note. There are simple and compelling mathematical reasons why a perfect fifth, perfect fourth, and major third are also found throughout musical cultures (in short, because they're based on 3:2, 4:3, and 5:4 ratios, respectively, and this creates the simplest possible patterns when you combine two waveforms).
Arguing that music is 100% relative is like trying to argue that art is 100% relative. Of course people's taste in art varies widely - but there are lots of universals. Perfect circles, and perfect squares tend to be universally pleasing. Anything that resembles the human form is universally pleasing (in music, any instrument that resembles the human voice in some way tends to be more universally pleasing than an instrument that is mostly unlike the voice). As a general rule, orange and red are associated with warmth, while blue and purple are associated with coolness. There are similar associations in music.
Remember that we're all human beings - we're all born with the same eyes, same ears, and very similar brains, and we all live on the same planet. Just like the nature/nurture argument, I think that the truth is probably that musical and artistic taste are a pretty even balance of nature (universals) and culture.
What I would suggest as a compromise, is this: if a work can be compiled with free tools, then other parties (other than the original copyright holder) should not be allowed to distribute derivative works that require proprietary tools for compilation.
That seems silly too. What if somebody ported my GPL'd Linux program to Windows, using the most common compiler on that platform, Microsoft's Visual C++, and in the process they added one new small feature. You're saying they wouldn't be allowed to release the modified code under the GPL because now it requires VC++? I would much rather that they release the code; I can always port it back to Linux later if I want.
Because I just bought a 17" iMac less than a month ago. Apple always upgrades boxes a month after I buy them.
From now on you should bookmark the MacRumors buyer's guide - they tend to be pretty accurate as to what you should and shouldn't buy if you want to get the best deal. For example, right now you should avoid buying xServes and Apple LCDs, since they're both overdue for an upgrade.
The currently Apple 20" flatscreen goes for $1299. You're paying $2199 for that attached to a 1.25GHz iMac... So in 3 years when the iMac is obsolete and the monitor is running fine, you can't attach that 20" flatscreen to anything. Hmm. Not good.
Three years ago the most expensive iMac was a $1500 iMac DV Special Edition, with a 500 MHz G3 and a DVD-ROM drive. Today, that iMac sells for ~$420 on eBay. Plus that machine would run Mac OS X 10.3 "Panther" just fine, so I'd hardly call it obsolete. I wouldn't call a Mac obsolete until it's 5 or 6 years old at least, but believe it or not, you'll still get cash for it on eBay.
Don't take this the wrong way, Gnuites, but I wish they hadn't gone for putting RS up on the stand...
RS is an idealist, and I honour him for his ideals, but idealism has no place in a courtroom, pragmatism is the rule of law.
Are you kidding? I understand your concerns -- RMS comes across as a total wacko -- but this is the guy who invented the GPL! I think he understands better than most people exactly why free software is on solid legal ground, so I think he'd be a fine person on the witness stand. No judge will have a hard time believing that the last thing in the world he would ever want to do would be to steal somebody else's source code and release it for free. He'd sooner rewrite it from scratch, as he's done hundreds of times before.
...How about we stop expecting portable electronics to be as powerful as non-portable electronics?...No, and by that I mean zero, laptops need a DVD-R. Almost no laptops need any 3D accelerator.
OK, even if I agreed that all of those things are not necessary in portable electronics, there's one thing that's totally critical in portable electronics and also a huge power drain: wireless communications. Trust me, it's not the camera in the cell phone that's wasting your battery, it's the transmitting.
The "killer feature" of laptops isn't a built-in DVD-R or a 3-D accelerator. It's 802.11 - and that uses a lot of power.
'Dotters discuss Disney.
Disney ditching drawing? Digital Disney? Dumb.
Donald Duck doesn't do dimensions. Dumbo doesn't. Dalmations don't. Drawings darling. Drawings delight.
Dinosaur dimensionful -- Dinosaur dumb. Duh.
Disney's dangerous decision dooms Disney's deliverables! Defines Disney's decay, death.
Don't deify dimensionality. Deceptive.
- Dominic
Any job which requires no creativity (for want of a less fuzzy word) can be done by a computer without any human intervention. For example, if you are simply entering data and running programs A, B and C, a better system could enter the data and run the programs without you.
I would say that any worker using a computer who can do his job without doing ANY programming could be replaced by a slightly better program than the one he is ``operating''. The only exceptions would be people doing jobs which are wholly creative, and could be done without a computer at all (e.g., writers, who could use pencil and paper).
Um, whatever. More and more jobs are in the service sector. That doesn't necessarily mean unskilled at all. Various forms of sales reps, counselors, attendants, personal trainers, chefs, waiters, etc - none of those jobs will ever be replaced by computers! Computers are getting rid of the boring jobs so that people can get jobs working with people!
The article was stupid. Most people don't need to know how to program, just like most people don't need to know algebra. I'm sure that programming will eventually be a normal part of high school, just like algebra, but you're learning it for the experience, not because you'll actually use it in your career.
High-quality digital recordings on a MP3 player? You have to be kidding, you will probably use a feature like that maybe once or twice in your life unless you are a professional and then you will probably have dedicated equipment that is way better than any MP3 player.
But what about the millions of amateur musicians out there? I would LOVE to have a device that I can take to an informal gig or jam session and make a decent-sounding recording, and then transfer it to my computer later. Right now I use a Sony Minidisc recorder, but you're limited to just a couple hours per disc if you want any sort of quality, and then you have to do an analog transfer of the audio to your computer later! Almost defeats the purpose of recording it digitally in the first place.
I was really hoping that the new iPods would record 44 KHz 16-bit audio from any line in, but alas, it looks like it's just voice quality. Quite a bummer. I'm definitely looking into some of those other devices.
Lots of people have responded with various ways to contact Microsoft, but the fact is that they get lots of junk, and as a result they miss out on a lot of interesting, useful mail people are sending them because the people they've hired to sort through their mail don't know what they're talking about.
How else do you explain that so many security researchers say that their emails to Microsoft were never returned?
I think that the real issue here is that it's impossible to contact anyone important at a large company like Microsoft. Suppose I discovered that one of their domains just expired, or I found a new security hole in IE, or found out the identity of someone inside Microsoft who had been "leaking" builds of Longhorn, or something like that. What do I do? All of their public telephone numbers and email addresses get routed to minimum-wage drones who wouldn't understand what I'm talking about, much less even have the authority to contact somebody who does.
In the specific case of security holes, Microsoft has repeatedly complained when people publish exploits without contacting them first, and yet in many cases the researcher who found the problem had been trying to contact Microsoft for weeks without getting any response.
I suppose the best way I could think of might be to send email to individual Microsoft employees I know of who might be willing to listen - there are some who post regularly to public newsgroups and mailing lists (and even Slashdot!) and one of them might pay attention. But how long would it take them to figure out who to contact to fix the problem?
Not that it's better in many other large companies. Anyone know of any large corporations where they're actually handling this well?
That did not work either. Still 2 out of 10 results not containing the phrase.
On bug result is has only "2Bee or Nottoobee", the other just has "to be" in it.
I agree that it would be nice occasionally to have Google just act as a "dumb" search engine, just returning pages that actually contain the phrase I selected and nothing else, but the fact is that every single one of the pages returned did have that exact phrase, or else it had something which is clearly an allusion to that line. And who's to say that an allusion to that line isn't exactly what somebody was looking for?
Here's the thing: a dumb search engine would ONLY return pages that contain that phrase. Google returns all of the pages that contain that phrase, PLUS other pages that contain something relevant or related to that phrase. Then it ranks all of those pages, and 2 of the top 10 turned out not to have the entire phrase.
...when they're making the kind of money even Google makes? The two founders of Google must be making several million dollars a year (if Google's profits of $150M a year are accurate).
I'd collect $10-20 and then go find something *interesting* to do. I'm sure running google would be interesting, but there's a whole huge world out there to be enjoyed, and $20M would make it very interesting indeed.
I don't think you truly appreciate just how interesting working at Google is to a hard-core computer scientist. Just imagine being surrounded by three hundred of the best computer scientists in the world (they have more Ph.D.'s than many small liberal arts colleges), terabytes worth of interesting data to mine through and test new algorithms on, virtually unlimited computer power to test your ideas, hundreds of interesting new problems to solve (look at Google Labs to see some of the things they're working on), a work environment with many of the frills of the dot-com era, minus the lack of a business plan, PLUS the thrill of working for a company that is very well-known and very popular?
The employees at Google are making very good salaries and they're having a blast. Of course some of them would like to have a shot at more money, but I think that the vast majority of them would be happy to spend the rest of their careers at Google even if they never IPO.