Prostituting oneself is a fundamental individual right. If it is not, then the government prostitutes, I mean politicians, should all be in jail and so should all those, who vote for them or give them money.
Or he could have thought about it for 10 minutes and said something like this:
API is a silhouette, a contour, an outline of an object, but it is not an object itaelf, it is a promise that the object will provide functionality that the contour is hinting about.
To copyright a contour while maybe possible should not penalize those, who want to provide their version of an object that is projecting the same contour. A contour of a woman's body is clearly recognizable but it does not say anything more than 'it is a woman'. A contour of a car promises that the object behind it is a car but the car itself with all of its parts cannot be seen.
Applications depend on such contours to request the functionality of the objects behind the contours. To allow a company to put a lock on a contour would destroy ability of applications to use each other's functionality and would significantly and negatively impact the economy.
To prevent others from projecting a promise of functionality by using an existing and well recognized description of that functionality through the means of these API object contours is to stop all development of alternative systems unless sanctioned by the current legally recognized owner of the specific object providing such functionality. But an outline of a system is not a system itself. An outline of a door is not a door yet it makes it clear that there is a door and it can be used.
Should a particular door maker be able to prevent others from making doors that people can walk through because we recognize a rectangle on a wall as a passage, as a door regardless of the company that made the door?
Except that is not true. API does not modify or interpret anything, an API is an agreement, a contract, a promise to accept inputs and to produce outputs in the way that can be incorporated into another system.
API only exists as an ephemeral description. The description is used in an applicatiin that expects the form described by the API to provide connection to the functionality behind it. once the compiler produces machine code the API form is gone, it ceases to exist in the same form, the implementation takes over.
API is the name and a promise to accept inputs of certain form and to provide outputs of a certain form. API does not have functionality beyond a promise (like translation you are using as an example). API is more like a silhouette of an object, the object itself may be guessed by the contours, but the object is not its contour.
API is a shape, a form, not any implantation of a shape or a form. I don't think it is difficult to explain but bad analogies are very dangerous when trying to explain in court.
You know, people maybe uninformed on minutia of a specific field but they are still trying their best to understand it, the first court decision probed that point. I wouldn't be so quick to call anybody clueless. On the other hand this could be a case of corruption, after all we are talking about Oracle and Larry here.
AFAIC Larry and Oracle lawyers in this case should be held personally responsible for all of this. If I were running Google (Alphabet?) I would be taking other measures, planning steps to stop these proceedings by means that have nothing to do with any court... We are talking about billions ( or more) here and about every application and system out there. Beside planning a hit on Oracle and its key people, I would also be working on the government level, trying to dismantle the entire copyright/patent system. Government must not have the authority to protect any company or individual from competition.
I think it's pretty clear the "individual freedoms" society will quickly be outstripped economically
- I don't think so. The society with more individual freedoms will have much higher capital savings and will be able to retool and defend and destroy a society, whose budget is subverted by a warmongering government. USA was the most productive economy in the world when WWII started but it had almost no tank production (as an example) and yet in a year it was already producing more tanks than anybody in the world, while the society, whose entire aim was military (Germany), production was very slow and could not be ramped up quickly.
If history proves anything it is that free people (and people before WWII were much freer than today in the USA) can, if necessary, protect themselves.
I am all for you vaccinating your kids. I may or may not vaccinate mine, my choice. Personally I don't give one billionth of a fuck about you, your kids and your opinions, but I am all for you getting every vaccine out there.
Tyranny is tyranny, doesn't matter whether it is income taxes, inflation via printing, vaccination or conscription. All of these are examples of tyranny and the societies that force these are tyrannical societies that must be reformed. Individual freedoms are more important than survival of specific societies and systems.
Oh, OK, comrade. But fuck you right back. Rights of individuals are above any collective as far as I am concerned.
Some parents not doing what all parents are 'supposed to do' in your world is a good thing. More should do the opposite of whatever the collective wants.
Ha, billions spent but so what? Where is the debt? There is no debt, there is huge surplus and a gigantic (biggest in the world now) manufacturing sector and output. Give me these problems - a huge productive output and a bunch of empty cities that could in principle be populated once prices drop due to the dollar collapse. OMG, humanity!
All those reasons are nonsense. The real reasons are a destroyed economy with no hope of getting from under the crashing debt, taxes, regulations, laws, the insane levels of inflation (money creation by the Fed and banks lending for consumption due to government guarantees).
USA economy is a walking talking zombie. It is unfortunate bit it will get much worse before restructuring of the debts and massive reduction of government spending and thus massive reduction in taxes and regulations will let it get any better.
Oh, by the way, China does not have economic problems at all compared to the USA compared to what is being 'reported'. China'd only problem is subsidising USA consumption and creating its own inflation for that purpose. USD collapsed will fix that.
The difference of course is that there are maybe a few thousand people qualified to transplant hearts but pretty much anybody at all without major disability can flip burgers. Not all jobs are the same, not even close. I hire people and I would hire many more if they cost me much less. Unfortunately the people I hire after a while become productive enough in my industry, that I have to pay them a competitive rate. Now to reduce my costs I hire most of my people in places that have low standard of living, where I can pay less than in the western countries. Actually my employees have very good wages compared to the rest of the population where they live, but from my point of view they are much more affordable than people in USA or Canada or Germany or France or the UK, etc. This makes me more productive by being more efficient, thus more competitive compared to some other firms in the business. Some of my employees make less than minimum wage in those countries and it helps me to hire more of them.
Why do I need more employees? Because then I can produce my stuff faster. Why do I want to produce it faster? Because then I can sell more. Why is that good? Because I want to grow the company and make more money. That is the point of course - to make money for myself. Unfortunately this requires hiring people, training them, renting space, paying utility bills, taxes (where cannot be avoided). All these things are needed and all of it has to be managed to make money. When I was a contractor I made much more money than when I started my own business. 6 years later I am still making much less money than while contracting, but not as bad as it was 6 years ago. Hopefully at some point I can make a return on all that risk and investment, otherwise what is the point (to paraphrase you there).
Incidentally some people got their jobs by working for me, but that is not the point. I am not doing any of what I am doing to provide jobs, but to make money for myself. If people would work for me for free I would take that, but they do not. I had people starting with me who had no experience at all. I do not pay them in the first weeks while I am training them, but once they are useful to me I have no choice but to pay or they would leave and with the training they would find a paying job. But I am not in the business of providing anybody with any form of standard of living, I do not care about that. I care to build a profitable business whatever that takes. Nobody is entitled to receive anything from me and of course everybody is free to leave. So no, I don't see at all that anybody out there is entitled to any 'standard of living' regardless of the type of the job they are doing. But if they are competitive they will build their standard of living.
Henry Ford never did what you are claiming in you ignorance. He doubled the wages of his employees to reduce turnover and to keep highly trained conveyor factory workers from leaving in a year time after becoming productive at his factories. He did lower the price of his cars by 50% in about a year after enacting that change because of how efficient his factories became due to automation (conveyor floor).
That little bit of economic ignorance that was drilled into your head can be replaced with actual facts if you bothered to learn as opposed to parotting nonsense.
I don't think we should have government at all actually. I am against the idea of perfect people, why are you begging the question? The strawman that you are burning has nothing to do with my suggestion.
I think people just do what they perceive to be best for them in any given circumstances, government does not change that at all, all it does is concentrating those of us, who are best at taking advantage of the system into the government itself, providing them with legal powers over the rest.
No, my position is that people are not 'perfect' (whatever the fuck that means) and that they will pull towards themselves under almost all conditions. Given that the best way to have a society is not to have any government laws and regulations and taxes especially given the fact that today we have more access to information and various resources, including ability to travel, than ever before in history of people on this planet.
I have a simple solution to your very complicated problem. Get rid of government welfare state altogether, government shouldn't be in business of pensions, education, health care or insurance, subsidising any business or individual, taking away from one person to give anything to another, deciding who and what wins or loses in the market of ideas and products, providing any form of utility by anybody to anybody, waging wars. Without these expenses you can completely get rid of payroll, income and wealth taxes and base all government spending on import, excise and sales taxes and have a tiny government and population that saves and invests all on its own.
The Orwellian idiot strikes again. Google hiding ads for loan businesses is nanny state protection, who declared Google to be the government? They have the right to discriminate of-course, so it's their right to hide whatever they want in their search results, but their morals will hurt people looking for payday loans in the free market.
First of all falling prices are what economies are all about. Economies should lower prices, that's the entire idea, otherwise why have an economy? What was extremely expensive at some point in time must become cheaper, what was unaffordable must become affordable, what was impossible must become possible. That's why we have airplanes, MRI, genetics, cars, guns, mobile phones, whatever.
Deflation does not cause any problems for the economy, that's nonsense. Just because your school taught you nonsense doesn't mean you should parrot it. Depressions are not caused by deflation, depressions are caused by economic problems, lack of production, lack of freedom to invest, lack of peace maybe. In a debt based 'economy' deflation is deleveraging, reducing amounts of debt that are created throughout the economy, most of this debt is completely unpayable so the holders must take a cut, and thus money is lost but also it is liberated for other purposes.
In a debt based society there is no economic growth that comes out of new development, all 'growth' comes as a result of money printing, which is what you are a proponent of because you were brainwashed by your politicians and the bought 'economists' to misunderstand economics, money and politics.
Gold is close to 1300USD today, in 1995 it was around 250. What you could buy for 100 dollars in 1995 you need more than 150 to buy today. That's a bad thing, not a good one, in a healthy economy the prices should be falling, not rising, the fact you don't understand it just shows what a great job has been done on you.
So will Google lend money to these high risk, low equity individuals, whose only way to live through the month before the next paycheck arrives may be by borrowing money from these so called 'loan sharks', people who are willing to lend money out to the highest risk individuals?
OMG. Constitution enumerates things that the government is allowed to do. It gives government certain powers over individuals. Government must not be able to do anything other than what is enumerated. The complete misunderstanding of this has been cultivated to destroy individual freedoms and to usurp power.
- I have a gold backed debit card, I could, though I don't use that for such insignificant purchases.
I don't want my employer to give me a certain weight of gold of a certain purity instead of dollars.
- because you are ignorant. Over the last 20 years the price of gold relative to the dollar went up by a factor of 5, did your dollar salary went up by 5 times since then?
The reason dollars work as money is that people expect them to work as money. The reason gold doesn't around here is that people don't want payment in gold, and insist on dollars.
- in 1914 workers at a Ford factory in the USA were making 5 dollars a day, on a 5 day week this gave them 20 dollars a week. Since the dollar was actually gold (paper fully redeemable in gold from a bank and by 1914 even the Federal reserve bank redeemed paper dollars with gold) and the relative valuation was 19 dollars for an ounce, in a month of work those labourers received 4.25 ounces of gold.
In 1914 only the top 1% paid income taxes (up to 7%) and there was no payroll tax at all. So Ford labourers had 4.25 ounces of gold a month all to themselves.
Today an ounce of gold is 1269USD. 4.25 ounces is 5393. Of-course there is a payroll tax that is eating a good chunk of that, there are income taxes as well and then there are various sales taxes on top. There are property taxes, etc. The prices for food, energy and other consumable items (including education and healthcare) were tiny compared to today's invoices. People paid for education, health care out of pocket. People either rented or bought houses, there was no consumer credit, everything was paid in cash. Women after marriage most often than not became house wives, a man supported his family (and they had 3 or more kids, that was the norm) without debt and on a single salary.
A Ford model T was selling for 400USD, which was about 21 ounces of gold. A car today can be bought for 21 ounces of gold (26649USD) and it's a much better car, it has much more than Ford model T had, so relative to gold, car prices went down.
What would a Ford factory worker need to get as a salary to net 4.25 ounces of gold today? I think it is very likely that a 120K salary would be needed given all the inflation and resulting rising prices.
At the end I will add this: all fiat currencies always failed, none ever survived long enough for somebody to remember them. Gold is the actual money and when the paper dollar dies and takes some other empty currencies with itself gold will be used again as money, so the question is what are you going to do then, since you obviously don't have any?
Offshoring is itself a symptom of the larger underlying issue: money manipulation by the government that promises the mob everything for free and the mob expecting it and more. This is the root cause, if we are going to talk about root causes. Offshoring is a symptom of the economic situation where the government destroyed the individual freedoms and money.
Slashdot Mirror
Prostituting oneself is a fundamental individual right. If it is not, then the government prostitutes, I mean politicians, should all be in jail and so should all those, who vote for them or give them money.
Or he could have thought about it for 10 minutes and said something like this:
API is a silhouette, a contour, an outline of an object, but it is not an object itaelf, it is a promise that the object will provide functionality that the contour is hinting about.
To copyright a contour while maybe possible should not penalize those, who want to provide their version of an object that is projecting the same contour. A contour of a woman's body is clearly recognizable but it does not say anything more than 'it is a woman'. A contour of a car promises that the object behind it is a car but the car itself with all of its parts cannot be seen.
Applications depend on such contours to request the functionality of the objects behind the contours. To allow a company to put a lock on a contour would destroy ability of applications to use each other's functionality and would significantly and negatively impact the economy.
To prevent others from projecting a promise of functionality by using an existing and well recognized description of that functionality through the means of these API object contours is to stop all development of alternative systems unless sanctioned by the current legally recognized owner of the specific object providing such functionality. But an outline of a system is not a system itself. An outline of a door is not a door yet it makes it clear that there is a door and it can be used.
Should a particular door maker be able to prevent others from making doors that people can walk through because we recognize a rectangle on a wall as a passage, as a door regardless of the company that made the door?
Do we want a single company to control all doors?
Except that is not true. API does not modify or interpret anything, an API is an agreement, a contract, a promise to accept inputs and to produce outputs in the way that can be incorporated into another system.
API only exists as an ephemeral description. The description is used in an applicatiin that expects the form described by the API to provide connection to the functionality behind it. once the compiler produces machine code the API form is gone, it ceases to exist in the same form, the implementation takes over.
API is the name and a promise to accept inputs of certain form and to provide outputs of a certain form. API does not have functionality beyond a promise (like translation you are using as an example). API is more like a silhouette of an object, the object itself may be guessed by the contours, but the object is not its contour.
API is a shape, a form, not any implantation of a shape or a form. I don't think it is difficult to explain but bad analogies are very dangerous when trying to explain in court.
You know, people maybe uninformed on minutia of a specific field but they are still trying their best to understand it, the first court decision probed that point. I wouldn't be so quick to call anybody clueless. On the other hand this could be a case of corruption, after all we are talking about Oracle and Larry here.
AFAIC Larry and Oracle lawyers in this case should be held personally responsible for all of this. If I were running Google (Alphabet?) I would be taking other measures, planning steps to stop these proceedings by means that have nothing to do with any court... We are talking about billions ( or more) here and about every application and system out there. Beside planning a hit on Oracle and its key people, I would also be working on the government level, trying to dismantle the entire copyright/patent system. Government must not have the authority to protect any company or individual from competition.
I think it's pretty clear the "individual freedoms" society will quickly be outstripped economically
- I don't think so. The society with more individual freedoms will have much higher capital savings and will be able to retool and defend and destroy a society, whose budget is subverted by a warmongering government. USA was the most productive economy in the world when WWII started but it had almost no tank production (as an example) and yet in a year it was already producing more tanks than anybody in the world, while the society, whose entire aim was military (Germany), production was very slow and could not be ramped up quickly.
If history proves anything it is that free people (and people before WWII were much freer than today in the USA) can, if necessary, protect themselves.
I am all for you vaccinating your kids. I may or may not vaccinate mine, my choice. Personally I don't give one billionth of a fuck about you, your kids and your opinions, but I am all for you getting every vaccine out there.
Tyranny is tyranny, doesn't matter whether it is income taxes, inflation via printing, vaccination or conscription. All of these are examples of tyranny and the societies that force these are tyrannical societies that must be reformed. Individual freedoms are more important than survival of specific societies and systems.
Oh, OK, comrade. But fuck you right back. Rights of individuals are above any collective as far as I am concerned.
Some parents not doing what all parents are 'supposed to do' in your world is a good thing. More should do the opposite of whatever the collective wants.
Anybody working from home bathes and sleeps there too, you don't have to be Chinese for that.
Ha, billions spent but so what? Where is the debt? There is no debt, there is huge surplus and a gigantic (biggest in the world now) manufacturing sector and output. Give me these problems - a huge productive output and a bunch of empty cities that could in principle be populated once prices drop due to the dollar collapse. OMG, humanity!
All those reasons are nonsense. The real reasons are a destroyed economy with no hope of getting from under the crashing debt, taxes, regulations, laws, the insane levels of inflation (money creation by the Fed and banks lending for consumption due to government guarantees).
USA economy is a walking talking zombie. It is unfortunate bit it will get much worse before restructuring of the debts and massive reduction of government spending and thus massive reduction in taxes and regulations will let it get any better.
Oh, by the way, China does not have economic problems at all compared to the USA compared to what is being 'reported'. China'd only problem is subsidising USA consumption and creating its own inflation for that purpose. USD collapsed will fix that.
The difference of course is that there are maybe a few thousand people qualified to transplant hearts but pretty much anybody at all without major disability can flip burgers. Not all jobs are the same, not even close. I hire people and I would hire many more if they cost me much less. Unfortunately the people I hire after a while become productive enough in my industry, that I have to pay them a competitive rate. Now to reduce my costs I hire most of my people in places that have low standard of living, where I can pay less than in the western countries. Actually my employees have very good wages compared to the rest of the population where they live, but from my point of view they are much more affordable than people in USA or Canada or Germany or France or the UK, etc. This makes me more productive by being more efficient, thus more competitive compared to some other firms in the business. Some of my employees make less than minimum wage in those countries and it helps me to hire more of them.
Why do I need more employees? Because then I can produce my stuff faster. Why do I want to produce it faster? Because then I can sell more. Why is that good? Because I want to grow the company and make more money. That is the point of course - to make money for myself. Unfortunately this requires hiring people, training them, renting space, paying utility bills, taxes (where cannot be avoided). All these things are needed and all of it has to be managed to make money. When I was a contractor I made much more money than when I started my own business. 6 years later I am still making much less money than while contracting, but not as bad as it was 6 years ago. Hopefully at some point I can make a return on all that risk and investment, otherwise what is the point (to paraphrase you there).
Incidentally some people got their jobs by working for me, but that is not the point. I am not doing any of what I am doing to provide jobs, but to make money for myself. If people would work for me for free I would take that, but they do not. I had people starting with me who had no experience at all. I do not pay them in the first weeks while I am training them, but once they are useful to me I have no choice but to pay or they would leave and with the training they would find a paying job. But I am not in the business of providing anybody with any form of standard of living, I do not care about that. I care to build a profitable business whatever that takes. Nobody is entitled to receive anything from me and of course everybody is free to leave. So no, I don't see at all that anybody out there is entitled to any 'standard of living' regardless of the type of the job they are doing. But if they are competitive they will build their standard of living.
Henry Ford never did what you are claiming in you ignorance. He doubled the wages of his employees to reduce turnover and to keep highly trained conveyor factory workers from leaving in a year time after becoming productive at his factories. He did lower the price of his cars by 50% in about a year after enacting that change because of how efficient his factories became due to automation (conveyor floor).
That little bit of economic ignorance that was drilled into your head can be replaced with actual facts if you bothered to learn as opposed to parotting nonsense.
Most people wouldn't bother to try and parse tour sentence. I think a program would actually do a better job at it.
I don't think we should have government at all actually. I am against the idea of perfect people, why are you begging the question? The strawman that you are burning has nothing to do with my suggestion.
I think people just do what they perceive to be best for them in any given circumstances, government does not change that at all, all it does is concentrating those of us, who are best at taking advantage of the system into the government itself, providing them with legal powers over the rest.
No, my position is that people are not 'perfect' (whatever the fuck that means) and that they will pull towards themselves under almost all conditions. Given that the best way to have a society is not to have any government laws and regulations and taxes especially given the fact that today we have more access to information and various resources, including ability to travel, than ever before in history of people on this planet.
I have a simple solution to your very complicated problem. Get rid of government welfare state altogether, government shouldn't be in business of pensions, education, health care or insurance, subsidising any business or individual, taking away from one person to give anything to another, deciding who and what wins or loses in the market of ideas and products, providing any form of utility by anybody to anybody, waging wars. Without these expenses you can completely get rid of payroll, income and wealth taxes and base all government spending on import, excise and sales taxes and have a tiny government and population that saves and invests all on its own.
The Orwellian idiot strikes again. Google hiding ads for loan businesses is nanny state protection, who declared Google to be the government? They have the right to discriminate of-course, so it's their right to hide whatever they want in their search results, but their morals will hurt people looking for payday loans in the free market.
First of all falling prices are what economies are all about. Economies should lower prices, that's the entire idea, otherwise why have an economy? What was extremely expensive at some point in time must become cheaper, what was unaffordable must become affordable, what was impossible must become possible. That's why we have airplanes, MRI, genetics, cars, guns, mobile phones, whatever.
Deflation does not cause any problems for the economy, that's nonsense. Just because your school taught you nonsense doesn't mean you should parrot it. Depressions are not caused by deflation, depressions are caused by economic problems, lack of production, lack of freedom to invest, lack of peace maybe. In a debt based 'economy' deflation is deleveraging, reducing amounts of debt that are created throughout the economy, most of this debt is completely unpayable so the holders must take a cut, and thus money is lost but also it is liberated for other purposes.
In a debt based society there is no economic growth that comes out of new development, all 'growth' comes as a result of money printing, which is what you are a proponent of because you were brainwashed by your politicians and the bought 'economists' to misunderstand economics, money and politics.
Gold is close to 1300USD today, in 1995 it was around 250. What you could buy for 100 dollars in 1995 you need more than 150 to buy today. That's a bad thing, not a good one, in a healthy economy the prices should be falling, not rising, the fact you don't understand it just shows what a great job has been done on you.
Banks had a government guarantee, so it turned out exactly like a moral hazard is supposed to.
So will Google lend money to these high risk, low equity individuals, whose only way to live through the month before the next paycheck arrives may be by borrowing money from these so called 'loan sharks', people who are willing to lend money out to the highest risk individuals?
Don't worry your pretty little head about a thing.
OMG. Constitution enumerates things that the government is allowed to do. It gives government certain powers over individuals. Government must not be able to do anything other than what is enumerated. The complete misunderstanding of this has been cultivated to destroy individual freedoms and to usurp power.
try to buy a loaf of bread with gold
- I have a gold backed debit card, I could, though I don't use that for such insignificant purchases.
I don't want my employer to give me a certain weight of gold of a certain purity instead of dollars.
- because you are ignorant. Over the last 20 years the price of gold relative to the dollar went up by a factor of 5, did your dollar salary went up by 5 times since then?
The reason dollars work as money is that people expect them to work as money. The reason gold doesn't around here is that people don't want payment in gold, and insist on dollars.
- in 1914 workers at a Ford factory in the USA were making 5 dollars a day, on a 5 day week this gave them 20 dollars a week. Since the dollar was actually gold (paper fully redeemable in gold from a bank and by 1914 even the Federal reserve bank redeemed paper dollars with gold) and the relative valuation was 19 dollars for an ounce, in a month of work those labourers received 4.25 ounces of gold.
In 1914 only the top 1% paid income taxes (up to 7%) and there was no payroll tax at all. So Ford labourers had 4.25 ounces of gold a month all to themselves.
Today an ounce of gold is 1269USD. 4.25 ounces is 5393. Of-course there is a payroll tax that is eating a good chunk of that, there are income taxes as well and then there are various sales taxes on top. There are property taxes, etc. The prices for food, energy and other consumable items (including education and healthcare) were tiny compared to today's invoices. People paid for education, health care out of pocket. People either rented or bought houses, there was no consumer credit, everything was paid in cash. Women after marriage most often than not became house wives, a man supported his family (and they had 3 or more kids, that was the norm) without debt and on a single salary.
A Ford model T was selling for 400USD, which was about 21 ounces of gold. A car today can be bought for 21 ounces of gold (26649USD) and it's a much better car, it has much more than Ford model T had, so relative to gold, car prices went down.
What would a Ford factory worker need to get as a salary to net 4.25 ounces of gold today? I think it is very likely that a 120K salary would be needed given all the inflation and resulting rising prices.
At the end I will add this: all fiat currencies always failed, none ever survived long enough for somebody to remember them. Gold is the actual money and when the paper dollar dies and takes some other empty currencies with itself gold will be used again as money, so the question is what are you going to do then, since you obviously don't have any?
You have mash for brains. Mafia ran staye is 'pure capitalism' that 'Ayn Randians' want? Ha!
Offshoring is itself a symptom of the larger underlying issue: money manipulation by the government that promises the mob everything for free and the mob expecting it and more. This is the root cause, if we are going to talk about root causes. Offshoring is a symptom of the economic situation where the government destroyed the individual freedoms and money.