Well there's a right way and a wrong way to go about correcting people. I was in the same situation several times in my career and I quickly learned that one of the many wrong ways is to say to someone that they're doing it wrong and need to fix it. I found that a better approach to correcting others is to let them come to the same conclusion. An innocent way to do this is to ask how someone how reached a certain argument, or to present facts that seem to contradict their point and ask them re-derive their conclusion.
Honestly the most effective way to prove a point to someone is to present it to them in a way that's memorable and fulfilling. That way they'll take it home and truly appreciate it. It doesn't work on everyone of course, but at least it will raise the percentage of battles that you win.
The link between the two is that there will always be social pressure to conform, rather than rely on facts, hard evidence and logic. Ad hominem and appeal-to-authority/majority fallacies are just too easy to fall for.
1. Only allow one crappy OS as the default for all new PC sales 2. Release functional but expensive version to replace crappy one. 3. Users have to either put up with insanity or shell out for upgrade. 4. Profit.
I'm all for pushing the envelope when there's an incentive involved. The National Ignition Facility was built with the specific purpose of developing a means for safe and sustainable nuclear power - this is a great reason to build a bigger laser. On the other hand, building the Biggest Laser In The World just for the sake of it is a pointless pissing contest and a sad waste of government revenue. Of course, the US already wastes enough on its defense budget; this is a far greater tragedy, but I digress.
Dude, if you're running into dependency issues, you're doing something very very very wrong. But judging by thesetwo comments, I'm gonna assume that you're either just stuck in an MS world and can't break out (optmistically) or an MS fanboy/shill who's trying to spread FUD.
Not sure where you're getting those numbers. In Q3 2012, HTC recorded net income of $137 million so burning millions on unnecessary lawyer fees is in the 1-10% range of their net income. That's pretty significant and a lot of revenue which could otherwise be put towards hardware or software development. God knows a few extra engineers would certainly help push out those Android updates for more models and/or earlier. Even with a cross-licensing deal, they'll probably lose millions to Apple... who knows what they're gonna get back (don't you love when they don't disclose the terms?). Such a waste.
HTC uesd to be a legitimate contender, so Apple did all they could to block them from the market. With all the resources HTC has diverted to the patent wars, they can't really compete anymore and Apple probably doesn't see them as a legitimate contender. Apple probably just figures they might as well suck whatever money's left taking from them. Borrowing from the Ars article on the same topic, HTC (read: the little guys) is just the upfront victim of the patent wars.
Yes, my post wasn't very clear. I thought you were defending Apple's first post with the statements about the other rulings because the judge didn't explicitly state not to include stuff like that. Sorry, I guess I misread your post....
The judges (there are more than one) specifically say they can not and are not barring Apple from saying whatever they want, even the outright lies, as that would be prior restraint. What they ARE requiring is that they have a page which contains ONLY the required text and nothing else.
Oh come on. Stop reading the ruling so literally. The judges can't possible state everything they want and don't want Apple to say short of writing the text for them (which completely defeats the purpose).
I sent my kids to their room last weekend, so to get revenge they drew on the wall with permanent marker, threw all the furniture out the window and burned an effigy. But I guess I didn't explicitly state that they shouldn't do that, so it was perfectly okay. Right?
So true. The fact that they ignore the patents of others while completely ignoring those of others should honestly have a negative impact on their case when they attack other companies. Sad that it hasn't....
I agree that there's a growing opinion in the industry that things need to change, but I don't think this is the solution. If lawmakers form their policies by only observing the words and actions of major corporations, they will in turn enact policies that favor the same large organizations while in the meantime, the small businesses and start-ups that don't have the capital to start out will get drowned out. In effect, we'll be back where we were in the 90s and early 2000s (if it hasn't even yet stopped) where Microsoft for example would buy up small start-ups that threatened their business, not to utilize and promote these new ideas and technologies, but to simply make these same things go away. Patents will become another weapon that large companies use against smaller ones to make sure that their businesses aren't threatened.
It's great that we see all the chaos that's prevailing, but really the only true victory will be if the patent system is reformed such that it serves its original business - to protect small companies and new ideas from being shunned out - whereas today it does the opposite. I know that it's impossible, particularly in the US where there are no voices without a monied interest behind, but I want to caution us all against falling into the arms of these greedy, monied interests who have no legitimate appreciation for values or fairness.
I tend to side with Google on most things, but even they are not above charging an extra $100 when it only costs them about $10 to double the storage (see the Nexus 10). I don't really store that much data on me Nexus, so it doesn't bother me that much, but it's still one of those things that pisses me off on principle.
There are other projects facing a similar fate. Firefox is the obvious one. They're making exactly the same kind of mistakes that the GNOME project made. At least they have time to learn from what happened to GNOME. At least the Firefox developers still have a chance to turn their ship around, and return to offering software that users actually want to use.
Firefox is fine. I thought like anyone else that their proposed release schedule was ludicrous, but now that I've seen the effects, I have to say that it wasn't a bad decision at all. Each release gets faster and more stable, and the updates go without a hiccup (save for the snag with the 16.0 release which was fixed very quickly). Firefox is still extremely relevant and still my favorite browser (it easily beats Chrome/Chromium on extensions, privacy and general configurability).
But Gnome3 is all-around terrible. It has zero configurability and Miguel de Icaza has seriously lost it, thinking he's some UI genius who's figured out some sort of universal UI which will be best for everyone. If he has any respect for former Gnome2 users, he should just come out and admit that he was thoroughly wrong on his philosophies which led to Gnome3 and he'll start putting back what users liked about it.
To be fair to Apple (with whom I thoroughly disagree), if they feel that the terms are not Reasonable, then they have every right to take that to court when Moto comes knocking. But given that every other company Moto has sought royalties from has found a way to comply with the terms, I expect Apple would be thoroughly smacked if they actually do try to argue that in court.
Slashdot Mirror
Well there's a right way and a wrong way to go about correcting people. I was in the same situation several times in my career and I quickly learned that one of the many wrong ways is to say to someone that they're doing it wrong and need to fix it. I found that a better approach to correcting others is to let them come to the same conclusion. An innocent way to do this is to ask how someone how reached a certain argument, or to present facts that seem to contradict their point and ask them re-derive their conclusion.
Honestly the most effective way to prove a point to someone is to present it to them in a way that's memorable and fulfilling. That way they'll take it home and truly appreciate it. It doesn't work on everyone of course, but at least it will raise the percentage of battles that you win.
The link between the two is that there will always be social pressure to conform, rather than rely on facts, hard evidence and logic. Ad hominem and appeal-to-authority/majority fallacies are just too easy to fall for.
1. Only allow one crappy OS as the default for all new PC sales
2. Release functional but expensive version to replace crappy one.
3. Users have to either put up with insanity or shell out for upgrade.
4. Profit.
Why should they?
I'm all for pushing the envelope when there's an incentive involved. The National Ignition Facility was built with the specific purpose of developing a means for safe and sustainable nuclear power - this is a great reason to build a bigger laser. On the other hand, building the Biggest Laser In The World just for the sake of it is a pointless pissing contest and a sad waste of government revenue. Of course, the US already wastes enough on its defense budget; this is a far greater tragedy, but I digress.
Dude, if you're running into dependency issues, you're doing something very very very wrong. But judging by these two comments, I'm gonna assume that you're either just stuck in an MS world and can't break out (optmistically) or an MS fanboy/shill who's trying to spread FUD.
Not sure where you're getting those numbers. In Q3 2012, HTC recorded net income of $137 million so burning millions on unnecessary lawyer fees is in the 1-10% range of their net income. That's pretty significant and a lot of revenue which could otherwise be put towards hardware or software development. God knows a few extra engineers would certainly help push out those Android updates for more models and/or earlier. Even with a cross-licensing deal, they'll probably lose millions to Apple... who knows what they're gonna get back (don't you love when they don't disclose the terms?). Such a waste.
Source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/08/htc-announces-3q-2012-financials/
HTC uesd to be a legitimate contender, so Apple did all they could to block them from the market. With all the resources HTC has diverted to the patent wars, they can't really compete anymore and Apple probably doesn't see them as a legitimate contender. Apple probably just figures they might as well suck whatever money's left taking from them. Borrowing from the Ars article on the same topic, HTC (read: the little guys) is just the upfront victim of the patent wars.
Yes, my post wasn't very clear. I thought you were defending Apple's first post with the statements about the other rulings because the judge didn't explicitly state not to include stuff like that. Sorry, I guess I misread your post....
The judges (there are more than one) specifically say they can not and are not barring Apple from saying whatever they want, even the outright lies, as that would be prior restraint. What they ARE requiring is that they have a page which contains ONLY the required text and nothing else.
Oh come on. Stop reading the ruling so literally. The judges can't possible state everything they want and don't want Apple to say short of writing the text for them (which completely defeats the purpose).
I sent my kids to their room last weekend, so to get revenge they drew on the wall with permanent marker, threw all the furniture out the window and burned an effigy. But I guess I didn't explicitly state that they shouldn't do that, so it was perfectly okay. Right?
With numbers like that, he could be an accountant for the MAFIAA!
So true. The fact that they ignore the patents of others while completely ignoring those of others should honestly have a negative impact on their case when they attack other companies. Sad that it hasn't....
Name one lawsuit that has been initiated by Google?
I agree that there's a growing opinion in the industry that things need to change, but I don't think this is the solution. If lawmakers form their policies by only observing the words and actions of major corporations, they will in turn enact policies that favor the same large organizations while in the meantime, the small businesses and start-ups that don't have the capital to start out will get drowned out. In effect, we'll be back where we were in the 90s and early 2000s (if it hasn't even yet stopped) where Microsoft for example would buy up small start-ups that threatened their business, not to utilize and promote these new ideas and technologies, but to simply make these same things go away. Patents will become another weapon that large companies use against smaller ones to make sure that their businesses aren't threatened.
It's great that we see all the chaos that's prevailing, but really the only true victory will be if the patent system is reformed such that it serves its original business - to protect small companies and new ideas from being shunned out - whereas today it does the opposite. I know that it's impossible, particularly in the US where there are no voices without a monied interest behind, but I want to caution us all against falling into the arms of these greedy, monied interests who have no legitimate appreciation for values or fairness.
And then use them to build a Beowulf cluster?
I tend to side with Google on most things, but even they are not above charging an extra $100 when it only costs them about $10 to double the storage (see the Nexus 10). I don't really store that much data on me Nexus, so it doesn't bother me that much, but it's still one of those things that pisses me off on principle.
You mean to say that it's half-full of Microsoft.
But as an optimist, I would rather say it's half free of it!
There are other projects facing a similar fate. Firefox is the obvious one. They're making exactly the same kind of mistakes that the GNOME project made. At least they have time to learn from what happened to GNOME. At least the Firefox developers still have a chance to turn their ship around, and return to offering software that users actually want to use.
Firefox is fine. I thought like anyone else that their proposed release schedule was ludicrous, but now that I've seen the effects, I have to say that it wasn't a bad decision at all. Each release gets faster and more stable, and the updates go without a hiccup (save for the snag with the 16.0 release which was fixed very quickly). Firefox is still extremely relevant and still my favorite browser (it easily beats Chrome/Chromium on extensions, privacy and general configurability).
But Gnome3 is all-around terrible. It has zero configurability and Miguel de Icaza has seriously lost it, thinking he's some UI genius who's figured out some sort of universal UI which will be best for everyone. If he has any respect for former Gnome2 users, he should just come out and admit that he was thoroughly wrong on his philosophies which led to Gnome3 and he'll start putting back what users liked about it.
Hm, perhaps. On the other hand, the DJIA is down only 3.4%, the NASDAQ down 6.2%, S&P down 3.2%, Nikkei dipped 6% over that time span and rebounded.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=dow+jones+over+last+7+weeks&dataset=&asynchronous=false&equal=Submit
Anyways, the numbers after the holiday season are going to be the most telling. That will be interesting for sure.
That depends on whether their Schwartz is as big as ours.
Tesla is based in Palo Alto, and they're building charging stations in California. However that's still a lot better than Las Vegas.
It was taken by a local who, as he left, was heard muttering 'Tourists....'
Some more eyeshadow and it'd be great on myspace
Obligatory: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_-SRYPec0ur0/TDiznY0mSbI/AAAAAAAALKA/JzJldoVcBbc/s1600/bounce3.gif (not recommended for work)
To be fair to Apple (with whom I thoroughly disagree), if they feel that the terms are not Reasonable, then they have every right to take that to court when Moto comes knocking. But given that every other company Moto has sought royalties from has found a way to comply with the terms, I expect Apple would be thoroughly smacked if they actually do try to argue that in court.
Apple doesn't have any patents.