it makes economic sense: don't charge more than the marginal cost of production in the long run, and for software, that's ZERO.
That is far from true. That's one of the biggest problems with our purely monetary system -- there is no measure for the labor hours, or the quality of those hours, that go into the production of much of anything. The cost of things that can't be measured monetarily is all too often assumed to be "ZERO", but that simply isn't true. Even freeware costs somebody something to make.
Also, let's keep in mind that the "free" in "free software" does not refer to money -- it doesn't mean that the software should cost $0.00. Rather, it means free as in freedom, as in we should have the freedom to use, redistribute, copy, and modify the software at will as long as any copy or modification always keeps the freedom associated with the original.
...or they simply have not bothered to create a way for customers to preemptivly opt-out (they don't want to give us the oppertunity until after they have published the first list, making the whole point of opting out moot.
We can only hope that this is the case with some phone company, because that company would then be used as an example, and they would be crucified for unfair practices, and tons of their customers would leave for another company.
I sympathize for those who would be forced to endure the aggravation of switching companies and phones and having to reprogram their phone books...:-P
Someone (I forget who) wants to make a directory of cellular numbers, which would then mean paying to stay off of it (like with landline). It's being fought.
Right, that was Slashdot story a week ago or so. Another response to my comment above just made the good point that it shouldn't be difficult to win a lawsuit (class action or otherwise) by making the argument that their spam costs us money. But then again, the free nights and weekends might get in the way of that. We can only fear a day when smart spammers are legally allowed to spam our cell phones during our free minutes time.
Maybe the reason why we have something like 3x the number of lawyers per capita of other industrialized nations is because increasingly, you can't go about your daily life without a good training in law. It shouldn't have to be that way, in my opinion.
It shouldn't have to be that way, but I think it's definitely a good thing that so many young American minds have found good reason, in forums like Slashdot and elsewhere, to inform themselves of a few behind-the-scenes legal processes and procedures. The fact that our young adults are motivated by the acquisition, spread, and integrity of useful information is a good sign for the next generation's worth of American government. Let's hope.
It's probably too late for that. The key is to be a good kid (i.e., never get caught) and keep your grades in good shape, but still never let them know where you're going, what you're doing, or when you'll be home, and never call while you're out to let them know you're okay unless you're not. This way, they're detached enough that they're compelled to buy the cell phone for you. The decision to call them once in a while on this fine piece of technology is a small price to pay for an otherwise free phone.
Exactly. I'm the college kid. The price I pay for not coughing up the cash is that my overanalytical mind is charged with the task of analyzing the bill for dotted i's and crossed t's, not to mention the fact that daddy wasn't exactly hip to what constitutes a good cell phone service provider or even a good phone.
But, in a world where most young adults and anyone younger are raised with computers and increasingly wireless technology, I thought it would be obvious that I had RTFTOS.
One term that gkuz left out in his comment above is that opinion articles that appear on editorial pages that are not representative of publication itself are either op-eds (what this article is) or letters to the editor (much, much lower on the editorial food chain).
Right. "Communism" emphasizes collective public ownership of property, which is contrary to American ideals. That's not what the open-source movement is going for. Open source is closer to "socialism", which emphasizes the collective public ownership of the means of production -- not the products of production -- and the freedom of the entire community to exercise political power.
In this particular case, the open-source movement advocates the individual's right to public information, especially information behind public processes that have a huge impact on government functions and operations. We have a right to understand exactly how such critical processes work in order that the integrity of such processes is preserved.
What is the purpose behind the research for insanely large prime numbers? I can almost understand the fascination, but my primitive mind can accept no logical reasoning behind the pursuit. Any guidance is appreciated!
Luckily, I'm not in California, but I have a problem with this bill of "rights" -- but first, here's a short segment from the article that clarifies some of the changes according to the new rules:
In one of the biggest changes, dissatisfied consumers will have the right to cancel their wireless service within 30 days of signing a contract.
Other changes include requiring all rates and other services terms to be posted on the Internet; requiring key contract terms to be in readable type, not fine print; and requiring carriers to list the address and toll-free number of regulators to make it easier for customers to file complaints.
"These are 'Thou Shalt Not Deceive The Customer' rules," said commission board member Geoffrey Brown, who wrote the proposal passed Thursday.
My cell phone is an incredibly affordable and efficient means of communication, especially given its portability. My main concern with my cell phone is privacy, so my main concern with this cell phone "bill of rights" is that it says nothing about keeping cell phone numbers private. This is because, quite simply, the phone companies have every right to distribute our information at will as long as such distribution is discussed in the terms of service that we agree to when we sign up. And even if it isn't, I don't think wireless users would have any legal footing if their provider gave out their number, because it is the company's number too.
Keeping customers' phone numbers private is a feature of every wireless service provider. In the not-too-distant future, I expect it to become a premium feature -- we will be forced to py a higher price and read even more paperwork before we will be guaranteed that our phone numbers will not be distributed to the next corporate entity that bids on them.
I guess my point is that, while this bill of "rights" appears to be nice, I don't see what it should be such a big deal. Most of the topics covered in the bill seem to be topics that a savvy legal mind could take a phone company to court for anyway.
I make $7K a year (but scholarships pay for tuition, fees, and books) and I have a $40 a month cell phone bill -- free nights and weekends, free calls to other Verizon phones, I've never encountered bad service -- and I don't even pay the bill, because I have this phone because mom and dad wanted to be able to track me down in a pinch.
So laugh all you want. I have a very nice phone, high quality service, and all at the price of simply acknowledging mom and dad on my own time here and there. Even at the most annoying times for conversing with the parental units, that's a good deal.
MARGO: Good morning, Gentlemen. Please be seated. I see we're still dressing in the dark, Eugene.
PLAGUE: (to Margo) Once again, don't call me Eugene. (to the board) A recent unknown intruder penetrated, using a superuser acount, giving him access to our whole system.
MARGO: Precisely what you're paid to prevent.
PLAGUE: Someone didn't bother reading my carefully prepared memo on commonly used passwords. Now, as I so meticulously pointed out, the for most used passwords are "love", "sex", "secret", and... "God". So would your holiness care to change her password?
Freeing slaves was the issue of the 19th century. Freeing information is the issue of the 21st century. Got a problem with that?
An average man like you can't stop people from swapping files, because it isn't going to happen. And it's just as much stealing as it is to record a video on your VCR and watch it repeatedly on your own time. It's just as much a crime as going 46 MPH in a Speed Limit 45 zone.
Welcome to the new entertainment world order. File-swapping is here to stay. Stop living in the past and start working on the future. Develop a business model that allows these artists to profit accordingly from their production, and screw the RIAA and other corporations who get paid a shitload for outdated service.
I think 95% of us are wondering, day and night, when the RIAA is going to come after me next. But I'll breathe a small sigh of relief for now, and single a little diddy to the tune of "Another One Bites the Dust." It's called, "Another One Makes the Cut".
Incidentally, if I worked for the RIAA, the original song would suffice.
What would Jesus do with a 92 TBps router? Route traffic, of course! Maybe that's what the afterlife uses to route new arrivals to their appropriate final destinations.
I I wasn't looking for a faster NIC, higher-quality cabling, a new ISP, and probably an all new place to live just to use the damn thing, I'd probably be looking for a way to sell it discreetly and anonymously -- because I'm certain I lack the means to acquire one legally.
I've noticed this as well. One of our home PCs (four years old, Windows ME, because I like comparing it to the XP machines) has stopped connecting to our ISP's servers -- no email, no newsgroups -- but I can still hit the internet just fine, with a noticeable three-second-or-so delay in connecting to anything after I've typed a location and pressed [Enter].
Agent (newsreader) reports a winsock error (10060, connection to server timed out) and Outlook (email) reports that the connection was unexpectedly terminated by the server.
What's really peculiar is that I can't even access the webmail web site from that computer (but support sites on the same domain name are fine), but it works fine in every other computer in the house going through the same connection. For instance, this computer can check email in all my installed email apps, it can receive news headers from the NNTP servers, and it can access web mail no problem.
What gives? (FYI: I use Cox High Speed Internet, formerly @home.)
Every few years, it seems, a new climate-change scare is publicized in order to keep the parade of emissions regulations rolling along. The scare is eventually debunked, but the debunking is never as widely disseminated as the original tale of woe. The end result is an erroneous public perception that, much like Saddam's supposed connection to 9/11, drives public policy toward a particular outcome, no matter what the real science suggests. (Draw your own conclusion.)
You must not have read my comment entirely, or you would have found my explanation that my opinion of Moore is just as baseless as his opinion of the Bush administration.
Slashdot Mirror
it makes economic sense: don't charge more than the marginal cost of production in the long run, and for software, that's ZERO.
That is far from true. That's one of the biggest problems with our purely monetary system -- there is no measure for the labor hours, or the quality of those hours, that go into the production of much of anything. The cost of things that can't be measured monetarily is all too often assumed to be "ZERO", but that simply isn't true. Even freeware costs somebody something to make.
Also, let's keep in mind that the "free" in "free software" does not refer to money -- it doesn't mean that the software should cost $0.00. Rather, it means free as in freedom, as in we should have the freedom to use, redistribute, copy, and modify the software at will as long as any copy or modification always keeps the freedom associated with the original.
I sympathize for those who would be forced to endure the aggravation of switching companies and phones and having to reprogram their phone books...
Right, that was Slashdot story a week ago or so. Another response to my comment above just made the good point that it shouldn't be difficult to win a lawsuit (class action or otherwise) by making the argument that their spam costs us money. But then again, the free nights and weekends might get in the way of that. We can only fear a day when smart spammers are legally allowed to spam our cell phones during our free minutes time.
It shouldn't have to be that way, but I think it's definitely a good thing that so many young American minds have found good reason, in forums like Slashdot and elsewhere, to inform themselves of a few behind-the-scenes legal processes and procedures. The fact that our young adults are motivated by the acquisition, spread, and integrity of useful information is a good sign for the next generation's worth of American government. Let's hope.
An excellent point, and one I overlooked. This should be modded +1 Insightful, +1 Informative, and +1 Interesting. :-P
It's probably too late for that. The key is to be a good kid (i.e., never get caught) and keep your grades in good shape, but still never let them know where you're going, what you're doing, or when you'll be home, and never call while you're out to let them know you're okay unless you're not. This way, they're detached enough that they're compelled to buy the cell phone for you. The decision to call them once in a while on this fine piece of technology is a small price to pay for an otherwise free phone.
Exactly. I'm the college kid. The price I pay for not coughing up the cash is that my overanalytical mind is charged with the task of analyzing the bill for dotted i's and crossed t's, not to mention the fact that daddy wasn't exactly hip to what constitutes a good cell phone service provider or even a good phone.
But, in a world where most young adults and anyone younger are raised with computers and increasingly wireless technology, I thought it would be obvious that I had RTFTOS.
Because I'm the one that reads all the fine details and overanalyzes the bill every month. It's the price I pay for not coughing up the cash. Kthxbye.
...because Microsoft would be in charge of validating our ballots!
One term that gkuz left out in his comment above is that opinion articles that appear on editorial pages that are not representative of publication itself are either op-eds (what this article is) or letters to the editor (much, much lower on the editorial food chain).
Right. "Communism" emphasizes collective public ownership of property, which is contrary to American ideals. That's not what the open-source movement is going for. Open source is closer to "socialism", which emphasizes the collective public ownership of the means of production -- not the products of production -- and the freedom of the entire community to exercise political power.
In this particular case, the open-source movement advocates the individual's right to public information, especially information behind public processes that have a huge impact on government functions and operations. We have a right to understand exactly how such critical processes work in order that the integrity of such processes is preserved.
What is the purpose behind the research for insanely large prime numbers? I can almost understand the fascination, but my primitive mind can accept no logical reasoning behind the pursuit. Any guidance is appreciated!
Keeping customers' phone numbers private is a feature of every wireless service provider. In the not-too-distant future, I expect it to become a premium feature -- we will be forced to py a higher price and read even more paperwork before we will be guaranteed that our phone numbers will not be distributed to the next corporate entity that bids on them.
I guess my point is that, while this bill of "rights" appears to be nice, I don't see what it should be such a big deal. Most of the topics covered in the bill seem to be topics that a savvy legal mind could take a phone company to court for anyway.
I make $7K a year (but scholarships pay for tuition, fees, and books) and I have a $40 a month cell phone bill -- free nights and weekends, free calls to other Verizon phones, I've never encountered bad service -- and I don't even pay the bill, because I have this phone because mom and dad wanted to be able to track me down in a pinch.
So laugh all you want. I have a very nice phone, high quality service, and all at the price of simply acknowledging mom and dad on my own time here and there. Even at the most annoying times for conversing with the parental units, that's a good deal.
You've got +1 Informative in my mind! :-)
Freeing slaves was the issue of the 19th century. Freeing information is the issue of the 21st century. Got a problem with that?
An average man like you can't stop people from swapping files, because it isn't going to happen. And it's just as much stealing as it is to record a video on your VCR and watch it repeatedly on your own time. It's just as much a crime as going 46 MPH in a Speed Limit 45 zone.
Welcome to the new entertainment world order. File-swapping is here to stay. Stop living in the past and start working on the future. Develop a business model that allows these artists to profit accordingly from their production, and screw the RIAA and other corporations who get paid a shitload for outdated service.
I think 95% of us are wondering, day and night, when the RIAA is going to come after me next. But I'll breathe a small sigh of relief for now, and single a little diddy to the tune of "Another One Bites the Dust." It's called, "Another One Makes the Cut".
Incidentally, if I worked for the RIAA, the original song would suffice.
Last I checked, a byte is 8 bits, so 92 TB would actually be 11.5 Tb.
What would Jesus do with a 92 TBps router? Route traffic, of course! Maybe that's what the afterlife uses to route new arrivals to their appropriate final destinations.
Hmm. If Peter is just a sysadmin....?
I I wasn't looking for a faster NIC, higher-quality cabling, a new ISP, and probably an all new place to live just to use the damn thing, I'd probably be looking for a way to sell it discreetly and anonymously -- because I'm certain I lack the means to acquire one legally.
I've noticed this as well. One of our home PCs (four years old, Windows ME, because I like comparing it to the XP machines) has stopped connecting to our ISP's servers -- no email, no newsgroups -- but I can still hit the internet just fine, with a noticeable three-second-or-so delay in connecting to anything after I've typed a location and pressed [Enter].
Agent (newsreader) reports a winsock error (10060, connection to server timed out) and Outlook (email) reports that the connection was unexpectedly terminated by the server.
What's really peculiar is that I can't even access the webmail web site from that computer (but support sites on the same domain name are fine), but it works fine in every other computer in the house going through the same connection. For instance, this computer can check email in all my installed email apps, it can receive news headers from the NNTP servers, and it can access web mail no problem.
What gives? (FYI: I use Cox High Speed Internet, formerly @home.)
Every few years, it seems, a new climate-change scare is publicized in order to keep the parade of emissions regulations rolling along. The scare is eventually debunked, but the debunking is never as widely disseminated as the original tale of woe. The end result is an erroneous public perception that, much like Saddam's supposed connection to 9/11, drives public policy toward a particular outcome, no matter what the real science suggests. (Draw your own conclusion.)
Badgers? We don't need no stinking badgers!
You must not have read my comment entirely, or you would have found my explanation that my opinion of Moore is just as baseless as his opinion of the Bush administration.