Actually, this is both interesting and apparently fits into the "suddenOutbreakOfCommonSense" category. If you ask me, it seems perfectly logical to not only stop it floating up into the air as it would do otherwise, but to also get power out of it.
Seems too good to be true. I wonder what the downside is.
Coming up with your own ideas instead of cloning everyone else's?
That depends on what your open source project is. If you want to replace a current application with an open source one, coming up with your own ideas of how to implement it won't be the best option. If I wanted my company to replace their versions of Microsoft Word with an open source word processor, I would want the application to reliably and hopefully in a simple way do all that Microsoft Word currently does. There is no point in making a word processor if it's so different and can do all these other things if it can't do the things I need it to do.
Coming up with ideas has nothing to do with open/prop source.
When making something new, to look into a market/niche that isn't being catered for currently, come up with new ideas, do things that no-one has done already. Be creative. When trying to take a market from someone else or to replace a product, copy the functionality features - but even at that point, it would be better to look at how those functions and features might be improved in the process. Giving someone a product that does exactly the same thing won't give them any incentive at all to change. Giving them a product that does the same things, but better/simpler/easier/quicker is when you will have a product worth swapping to.
Forget your banter about holidays, this is the funny part of the article:
...the franchise has generated over $1 billion to date...
It also said that due to royalties it would need to be more "selective" about track listings, and that it needs more support from the music industry in that department.
We ain't making enough cash off this donkey. Find me a cheaper one.
There. TTFY.
Why can't a company look at a product and simply say "You know, we had a good idea and we did it well." Why do they always have to look at how they can do the same idea again and try to fuck someone over harder to make the same money? It's the IDEA that's the money maker, not screwing over some part of the liabilities sheet. Seriously. Just once?
Customers should be able to control the throttling though so they don't use up all the bandwidth during peak hours
There is plenty of throttling software you can get for yourself - for free. Anyone can throttle their own connection.
Those who do want to have high speed during those times would pay through the roof for it or have a plan that limits the amount of high speed traffic during peak hours up to a certain # of GB and then throttles it down thereafter.
That's how many plans are done here in Aus.
I still stand by my statement above. If a company sells 100gb to 10000 customers, they better well have the infrastructure to support it, otherwise don't overstretch your systems.
What pisses me off is when they assume that a person on a 100gb plan will actually use 20Gb, so they keep wracking up customers, based on their 20% average until their systems are saturated with traffic, then kick up a stink when their customers start using what they paid for originally.
ISPs have a strong incentive to reduce heavy bittorrent traffic on their networks so they don't have to upgrade as often. If they can delay these upgrades under the guise of supporting intellectual property rights, it's a win win for them. I'm not saying I support this kind of thing, but it makes business sense.
Totally agree with that. Bandwidth costs money, sure the cost might be dropping, but why would you (as an ISP) actually WANT your consumers to go using all that bandwidth that you are selling them? Wouldn't it make much more business sense to sell them a plan with 100Gb (Yes, in Australia, that's still considered a very high amount of traffic) and have them use 2Gb for their surfing and emails - oh, and find a nice way to kick off all those customers who actually use what they pay for - without looking like it's got anything to do with you, after all, if you sell high usage accounts, you can't kick off high users... erm... wait wat?
That make you feel more at home on slashdot, or should I just start spewing out random car analogies, math solutions and have a crack about privacy/microsoft/overlord?
Or you could also get the users to start keeping certain files opening or putting a lock on them so he can't get at them. After three hours of "this file is in use" maybe he will get the message and ask for a copy.
That or just get some thugs to find him in an alley and "ask him nicely" to stop being such a prat.
Perhaps so, but reasons and what-ifs aside, I wonder how they plan to block the vast amount of browser games that are certainly violent? How do you stop the internets?
Do they really think it's possible to put a block on every violent game link? What about phone games? I seem to recall that Quake 1 just got ported to Andriod or iPhone?
Interesting stance for a government to take, but really, honestly, truly. Goodluckwiththat.
No need to be so condecending there. I am Australian and indeed have very litte understanding of the US judicial system. The post was more of a question (in my disbelief) about your legal system than anything else.
Having said that, it makes a little more sense now, though I am still perturbed by the whole process. At a guess, it seems that no matter what happens now, he will either be out of pocket for two years work at the minimum, or two years work and a lifetime worth of legal bills to pay - or a lifetime of legal bills and in prison for a very long time.
Is his courtcase date set when HE is ready, or if he opens that can of worms (saying I am not ready) it will then go ahead when both the prosecution and defense are ready? Is there some sort of maximum time that can elapse?
The state sponsered TV channels in Oz are the only one's left with any real journalists, this prick won't be satisfied until he removes every last skeric of independence.
Absolutely. If I watch TV news (which I admit I rarely do) I will pick ABC news, SBS news (It's more world focused) and shy of those two, I have found the German News (DW News Hour) to be amazingly informative.
Having read this article (from the link to google results you posted I find the following statements simply laughable:
Mr Murdoch slammed Radio 2's effort to woo younger listeners by hiring presenters on "salaries no commercial competitor could afford".
Bollocks. If a private company had half the country listening, it's advertising revenue would MORE THAN cover the salaries of a bunch of presenters.
"There is general agreement that the natural operation of the market is inadequate, and that a better outcome can be achieved through the wisdom and activity of governments and regulators."
"This creationist approach is similar to the industrial planning which went out of fashion in other sectors in the 1970s. It failed then. It's failing now."
Come again? I read: The natural operation of the market is inadequate, and a better outcome has been reached through the wisdom and activity of governments and regulators.
While the approach may not have worked in the 1970s, they clearly have a winning strategy right now, and it's leaving other private enterprises out in the cold.
Sorry, but when private enterprise can't do a good enough job, and a publically funded organisation start showing them up, it's time for them to reel back? Piss off mate. That's the EXACT opposite of market freedom. The guy is just annoyed that HIS company doesn't have half of Britain listening, and that the BBC are providing an excellent service from public funds for free to the public that pay for it - along with ALL THE ADVERTISERS.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think the days that the BBC wasn't in the black from it's own revenue are long history. Amazingly popular shows on it's TV side (Nature docos, popular shows like Top Gear) and their now massive DVD sales sure must line the bottom line of BBC quite well.
As far as I know, you don't get any compensation for the time spent in jail awaiting trial.
Good god, are you serious? That's like... unethical or something isn't it? Wow. I don't live in the US, but wow, that's a country I wouldn't ever want to be accused of something I didn't do in.
This guy really has no recourse against the prosecution (assume it's the US Government here) if he is found innocent?? No "give me back what I would have earned, pay some sort of damages for freedom lost" or something similar?
Of course, there was some shadiness in that Childs decided to only tell them what they asked for vice what they needed to know...
Yeah, he was being totally an asshat about it, but that's no reason to put a man into jail for two years if you ask me. How about put him in jail until control of the system is restored?
I am not totally sure how the American legal system works, but if he is found not guilty, which I sort of assume he will, won't that effectively give him carte blanche to sue for the time he spent in prison?
Not to mention the 14-odd jurors who have to show up 8:30AM at the courthouse for 12-16 weeks while this idiocy unfolds. Part of their lives is being stolen away too.
The thing that worries me the most is that if you are the defense, and you see a juror who is clearly totally non technical and "ITS COMPUTERZ AND SCARY", you kick them from the jury list. While if a juror is tech savvy, the prosecutor will kick them as you will no doubt side with the technical guy who was doing his sysadmin job.
I really wonder who that leaves to be on the jury for this. What is the jury comprised of? To really be a good juror on this, you should have at least some understanding of things technical, yet be impartial enough to be able to make the correct call on the legality of it.
Just who fits into that bucket? I can't think of anyone I know. Either all techies to the bone, or so nontechnical that I could not fathom how on earth they could hold this man's freedom in their hands without buckling.
Is this the good old U. S. of A. that stands for Justice, Liberty and Truth?
I think it's been a really good while since it actually stood by that slogan. I think it's really the country that stands for what's best for it's corporations and lobby groups, where there is justice for either those with buckets of money and where the truth is whatever the winning side says at the end.
You know, it's morning here as I read this, and nothing makes me giggle more than a post by someone who misread the article, followed by ten or more posts showing the incorrect math used, examples and why the post is mislead.
I haven't worked out whether it's
a) Altruism - No my friend, you got this wrong, here is how you were meant to interpret the article.
b) Pack mentality - No brother, you need to read it correctly, if we all read it correctly, our slashpack will become the most powerful pack on earth and we will enjoy the good life.
(It starts going downhill from here)
c) Nitpicking - You silly slashdotter, you read it wrong, naaarrny naarny nar nar!
d) Douchebaggery - Check it out, I am so much smarter than you, I am like a million times smarter than you, I read it correctly! Here is how it's meant to be read. Now bask in my glory!
But whatever the case, it's amusing, and I don't think there are many other sites that give me both nerd news and giggles.
http://cryptome.org/ is back up and has dozens of different companies similar documents from the likes of yahoo, facebook, paypal, myspace, aol, skype, et al.
Since coming back online he has made all of those available at the top of his website because of the interest generated from his temporary censorship.
Hello, Ms Streisand, is that you? I have Mike Masnick on the phone. He says it's important.
If you don't get it click here and join those that do.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd tap that.
Actually, this is both interesting and apparently fits into the "suddenOutbreakOfCommonSense" category. If you ask me, it seems perfectly logical to not only stop it floating up into the air as it would do otherwise, but to also get power out of it.
Seems too good to be true. I wonder what the downside is.
How could open source survive without it? :)
Coming up with your own ideas instead of cloning everyone else's?
That depends on what your open source project is. If you want to replace a current application with an open source one, coming up with your own ideas of how to implement it won't be the best option. If I wanted my company to replace their versions of Microsoft Word with an open source word processor, I would want the application to reliably and hopefully in a simple way do all that Microsoft Word currently does. There is no point in making a word processor if it's so different and can do all these other things if it can't do the things I need it to do.
Coming up with ideas has nothing to do with open/prop source.
When making something new, to look into a market/niche that isn't being catered for currently, come up with new ideas, do things that no-one has done already. Be creative. When trying to take a market from someone else or to replace a product, copy the functionality features - but even at that point, it would be better to look at how those functions and features might be improved in the process. Giving someone a product that does exactly the same thing won't give them any incentive at all to change. Giving them a product that does the same things, but better/simpler/easier/quicker is when you will have a product worth swapping to.
There is something wrong when seeing use of the correct word in the right manner starts becoming funny...
What's this "free world" you speak of?
The part that just went ha ha to basically the rest of the US shills in countries that followed the US lobby tune and decided to run with it.
...the franchise has generated over $1 billion to date...
It also said that due to royalties it would need to be more "selective" about track listings, and that it needs more support from the music industry in that department.
We ain't making enough cash off this donkey. Find me a cheaper one.
There. TTFY.
Why can't a company look at a product and simply say "You know, we had a good idea and we did it well." Why do they always have to look at how they can do the same idea again and try to fuck someone over harder to make the same money? It's the IDEA that's the money maker, not screwing over some part of the liabilities sheet. Seriously. Just once?
Customers should be able to control the throttling though so they don't use up all the bandwidth during peak hours
There is plenty of throttling software you can get for yourself - for free. Anyone can throttle their own connection.
Those who do want to have high speed during those times would pay through the roof for it or have a plan that limits the amount of high speed traffic during peak hours up to a certain # of GB and then throttles it down thereafter.
That's how many plans are done here in Aus.
I still stand by my statement above. If a company sells 100gb to 10000 customers, they better well have the infrastructure to support it, otherwise don't overstretch your systems.
What pisses me off is when they assume that a person on a 100gb plan will actually use 20Gb, so they keep wracking up customers, based on their 20% average until their systems are saturated with traffic, then kick up a stink when their customers start using what they paid for originally.
ISPs have a strong incentive to reduce heavy bittorrent traffic on their networks so they don't have to upgrade as often. If they can delay these upgrades under the guise of supporting intellectual property rights, it's a win win for them. I'm not saying I support this kind of thing, but it makes business sense.
Totally agree with that. Bandwidth costs money, sure the cost might be dropping, but why would you (as an ISP) actually WANT your consumers to go using all that bandwidth that you are selling them? Wouldn't it make much more business sense to sell them a plan with 100Gb (Yes, in Australia, that's still considered a very high amount of traffic) and have them use 2Gb for their surfing and emails - oh, and find a nice way to kick off all those customers who actually use what they pay for - without looking like it's got anything to do with you, after all, if you sell high usage accounts, you can't kick off high users... erm... wait wat?
Okay, how about this then...
Are you like hot.. and stuff?
That make you feel more at home on slashdot, or should I just start spewing out random car analogies, math solutions and have a crack about privacy/microsoft/overlord?
I would ask at what point did HE stop wanting to go through all the medicines and procedures?
If you ask me, that's when it should have stopped.
Or you could also get the users to start keeping certain files opening or putting a lock on them so he can't get at them. After three hours of "this file is in use" maybe he will get the message and ask for a copy.
That or just get some thugs to find him in an alley and "ask him nicely" to stop being such a prat.
hypocrisy
Perhaps so, but reasons and what-ifs aside, I wonder how they plan to block the vast amount of browser games that are certainly violent? How do you stop the internets?
Do they really think it's possible to put a block on every violent game link? What about phone games? I seem to recall that Quake 1 just got ported to Andriod or iPhone?
Interesting stance for a government to take, but really, honestly, truly. Goodluckwiththat.
Personally I wonder if the Blue Screen of Death is replaced with a Red Screen of Dissention.
No need to be so condecending there. I am Australian and indeed have very litte understanding of the US judicial system. The post was more of a question (in my disbelief) about your legal system than anything else.
Having said that, it makes a little more sense now, though I am still perturbed by the whole process. At a guess, it seems that no matter what happens now, he will either be out of pocket for two years work at the minimum, or two years work and a lifetime worth of legal bills to pay - or a lifetime of legal bills and in prison for a very long time.
Is his courtcase date set when HE is ready, or if he opens that can of worms (saying I am not ready) it will then go ahead when both the prosecution and defense are ready? Is there some sort of maximum time that can elapse?
The state sponsered TV channels in Oz are the only one's left with any real journalists, this prick won't be satisfied until he removes every last skeric of independence.
Absolutely. If I watch TV news (which I admit I rarely do) I will pick ABC news, SBS news (It's more world focused) and shy of those two, I have found the German News (DW News Hour) to be amazingly informative.
"Your actions don't suit my business model-- stop it." Now where have we heard this before?
MIA.... No... CIA.... perhaps. Goddamit, it's right here on the tip of my tongue...
Mr Murdoch slammed Radio 2's effort to woo younger listeners by hiring presenters on "salaries no commercial competitor could afford".
Bollocks. If a private company had half the country listening, it's advertising revenue would MORE THAN cover the salaries of a bunch of presenters.
"There is general agreement that the natural operation of the market is inadequate, and that a better outcome can be achieved through the wisdom and activity of governments and regulators."
"This creationist approach is similar to the industrial planning which went out of fashion in other sectors in the 1970s. It failed then. It's failing now."
Come again? I read: The natural operation of the market is inadequate, and a better outcome has been reached through the wisdom and activity of governments and regulators.
While the approach may not have worked in the 1970s, they clearly have a winning strategy right now, and it's leaving other private enterprises out in the cold.
Sorry, but when private enterprise can't do a good enough job, and a publically funded organisation start showing them up, it's time for them to reel back? Piss off mate. That's the EXACT opposite of market freedom. The guy is just annoyed that HIS company doesn't have half of Britain listening, and that the BBC are providing an excellent service from public funds for free to the public that pay for it - along with ALL THE ADVERTISERS.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think the days that the BBC wasn't in the black from it's own revenue are long history. Amazingly popular shows on it's TV side (Nature docos, popular shows like Top Gear) and their now massive DVD sales sure must line the bottom line of BBC quite well.
My guess, these changes will B-B-Backfire!
That is perhaps the most pretentious coffee-sip I have ever experienced in text form. My fedora is off to you.
*sips coffee*
:D
As far as I know, you don't get any compensation for the time spent in jail awaiting trial.
Good god, are you serious? That's like... unethical or something isn't it? Wow. I don't live in the US, but wow, that's a country I wouldn't ever want to be accused of something I didn't do in.
This guy really has no recourse against the prosecution (assume it's the US Government here) if he is found innocent?? No "give me back what I would have earned, pay some sort of damages for freedom lost" or something similar?
I am totally and utterly slackjawed at this.
Of course, there was some shadiness in that Childs decided to only tell them what they asked for vice what they needed to know...
Yeah, he was being totally an asshat about it, but that's no reason to put a man into jail for two years if you ask me. How about put him in jail until control of the system is restored?
I am not totally sure how the American legal system works, but if he is found not guilty, which I sort of assume he will, won't that effectively give him carte blanche to sue for the time he spent in prison?
Not to mention the 14-odd jurors who have to show up 8:30AM at the courthouse for 12-16 weeks while this idiocy unfolds. Part of their lives is being stolen away too.
The thing that worries me the most is that if you are the defense, and you see a juror who is clearly totally non technical and "ITS COMPUTERZ AND SCARY", you kick them from the jury list. While if a juror is tech savvy, the prosecutor will kick them as you will no doubt side with the technical guy who was doing his sysadmin job.
I really wonder who that leaves to be on the jury for this. What is the jury comprised of? To really be a good juror on this, you should have at least some understanding of things technical, yet be impartial enough to be able to make the correct call on the legality of it.
Just who fits into that bucket? I can't think of anyone I know. Either all techies to the bone, or so nontechnical that I could not fathom how on earth they could hold this man's freedom in their hands without buckling.
Is this the good old U. S. of A. that stands for Justice, Liberty and Truth?
I think it's been a really good while since it actually stood by that slogan. I think it's really the country that stands for what's best for it's corporations and lobby groups, where there is justice for either those with buckets of money and where the truth is whatever the winning side says at the end.
You know, it's morning here as I read this, and nothing makes me giggle more than a post by someone who misread the article, followed by ten or more posts showing the incorrect math used, examples and why the post is mislead.
I haven't worked out whether it's
a) Altruism - No my friend, you got this wrong, here is how you were meant to interpret the article.
b) Pack mentality - No brother, you need to read it correctly, if we all read it correctly, our slashpack will become the most powerful pack on earth and we will enjoy the good life.
(It starts going downhill from here)
c) Nitpicking - You silly slashdotter, you read it wrong, naaarrny naarny nar nar!
d) Douchebaggery - Check it out, I am so much smarter than you, I am like a million times smarter than you, I read it correctly! Here is how it's meant to be read. Now bask in my glory!
But whatever the case, it's amusing, and I don't think there are many other sites that give me both nerd news and giggles.
*sips coffee*
I hope this doesn't turn into a boron and predictable thread of chemistry puns.
A post like that is like a big Neon sign just asking for it to happen though.
http://cryptome.org/ is back up and has dozens of different companies similar documents from the likes of yahoo, facebook, paypal, myspace, aol, skype, et al.
Since coming back online he has made all of those available at the top of his website because of the interest generated from his temporary censorship.
Hello, Ms Streisand, is that you? I have Mike Masnick on the phone. He says it's important.
If you don't get it click here and join those that do.