You are missing the issue. Sure the 300 million people would be easy to target, but that's missing the point. Imagine the uproar of any country that decided to kill 100 million people? You would have a bloody world war.
Starvation, transportation, boats, and fuel. Come on people can feed themselves. It just needs to be organized. And why do you assume that they all of the sudden decide to drive? Why could they not walk and trucks carry the supplies?
What I say is not impossible, and what the problem is that people in the Western world do not think it is possible. However, in many other parts of the world people need quite a bit less and can get along with simpler solutions.
Why is this considered insightful? Is this really protectionism? Frankly would any government buy military from another country if they did not have to?
When was the last time that military powers like the US, Russia, England, France bought something from other countries? Outside of the screws that hold everything together not at all!
Outside of the government there is trade and countries do buy products from other countries, and from subsidaries of companies from other countries.
Now about outsourcing for lawyers, I am sure it will happen. Politicians not being outsourced, well that is YOUR OWN DAMM FAULT! Polticians happen to be citizens of the country they represent. Very few voters have yet to vote on a foreigner! I suppose it defeats the purpose of voting, and citizenship, no?
Police? Well, how in tarnations is a cop going to investigate a crime scene when they are thousands of km/miles away.
Want to know something. Imagine 300 million Chinese decided one day to the next to pick and leave. There would still be 1.2 billion living in the country. This "little" group walks through Siberia, and then reaches Alaska. So Alaska will have 300 million people knocking on their door. What is the US going to do? Bomb them? Yeah, right! You might as well just bomb all of Alaska while you are at it. There are 300 million people saying let me in, and there is not a darn thing you or anybody can do about it!
Frankly the Far East is the power of the 21'th century, as I sit here in the Western "Civilized" world.
Yes you get quality news in Slashdot and blogs. You wanna know why? Because there is critique. Maybe the article itself might be leaning one way or another, but the comments will provide the necessary explanations or corrections.
I find Slashdot fascinating because of the comments. Yes there are idiots, but there are also very intelligent people making intelligent comments. Where do you get that in newspapers? Newspapers have a single editor (or small team) with certain slants.
Take for example anything that Fox news produces. There is a slant in their news. Can anybody critique the comments Fox news has made? No, because they control the medium and the reactions. With Slashdot and Blogs that is simply not the case. Slashdot and blogs represent the voices of the people! And after all is that not what the news is all about, the people?
Here is a scenario. You fly from London to Los Angeles. Of course it is a brand new AirBus 380. This one has seats for 800. At the same time a flight comes from Tokyo, and five other destinations. So at the same time we have 5600 people landing!
One word, [sarcasm]Wonderful[/sarcasm]. LAX is slow enough, but with these beasts in the air you might as well forget getting out of the airport in less than two hours.
On this one Boeing has the right answer. The problem is that the infrastructure is not equipped to deal with these planes. The hubs are already busy enough. Forget about expanding the hubs as that will take years, and years...
No, welcome to cattle country, ladies and gentlemen...
Living in Switzerland, and having lived in Germany, I will disagree with you. If you live near Koeln sure you can't move five meters. However, I was living in Southern Germany and former east Germany and there is still plenty of stretchs to put the pedal to the metal. In fact I could often do 250KPH. My car could do faster, but it is limited.
This is exactly the kind of propaganda governments like to spew.
1) Yes there are citizens who drive fast and follow too close. Just like there are citizens who smoke, eat too much, don't excercise, fart and burp in public. FACE reality, that is called humanity.
2) Speeding tickets has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with making money in the government. Don't believe me? Check the revenue at the local law enforcement office.
3) Hazardous driving like following too close, passing too tightly, which is on the books of as illegal, has no revenue stream. Yet these actions themselves are highly dangerous and CAUSE accidents. Why are cops not checking for these infractions? Simple, it means WORK, and the revenue earned is less than the effort required. Meaning its not a cash cow.
4) Highway speeds are way too low. Why is it that in Germany you can drive as fast as you can, Switzerland is 120 KPH, Austria 130 KPH, France 130 KPH, Canada 100 KPH, and the US 90-110 KPH? So that means driving by the books in Germany gets you speed tickets most other places, driving by the book in France and Austria will get you tickets in Canada and the US? Come on, these are artificial limits setup so that MOST people people end up speeding.
These days cars and highways for a large part have become safe enough for 150-160 KPH. And with electronic signs in many countries aspeed limit can be altered reflecting the conditions on the highway. Why is this not enforced? Simple, speed tickets = cash cow = simple way of saying, "We are tough on accidents". BS, BS, BS!!!
You are right in that there are two sides. However, I think it is more "Freedom to drive like an idiot". After all we are humans, humans that cherish freedom above everything else. As a friend says to me, average means that 50% of the people are dumber than you. But it also means that they have the right to be dumber than you and you can't do anything about it!
I think what would bother me regarding the UAE deal is that it will be VERY one sided. Do you REALLY think that any UAE citizen, or any UAE royal family member will get speeding tickets? When pigs fly!
But I agree, I would would pull it off my car and throw it somewhere....
I never said that Tridge did or did not violate any license. In fact I agree with you. Why did you think I was disagreeing with you?
What I was referring to is that BitKeeper is annoyed at something that they should have seen coming. Frankly Bitkeeper is here at fault and not Tridge!
This thinking I find funny. Lets say that Microsoft gave a free product, and then later charged money. There would be hell to raise, including statements like, "See I told you the evil borg had a hidden agenda".
Well, bitkeeper did a bait and switch with the Linux kernel and that is NOT funny! Bitkeeper should have known this and not made the offer in the first place, and Linus should not have accepted the offer!
In this one situation Linus and Bitkeeper screwed up, and made a bad decision that impacts something that many many people rely on!
I regularly use three platforms; Windows, Linux (Fedora) and OSX. Conclusion? I cringe at having to use Windows. I find that once you learn UNIX it is faster to get anything done. Albeit you have to learn UNIX.
Now having said that, what I see more off are peacock articles. All fluff and very little facts because the three operating systems are TOO similar. Compare it to cars. These days all of the cars are good enough! They will last four years without too many problems. So then how do you distinguish yourself? Write articles like a peacock struts its feathers, all emotional.
The easiest way to illustrate this peacock argument is to take a bushman from the jungle and get them to figure out what a computer does. Without helping them. My guess is that the bushman will have a hard time figuring out what the mouse is for. Most likely they will use the mouse as a slingshot and head back into the jungle. I am not saying that bushmen are dumb. I am saying that computers require some upfront learning time regardless of the OS used.
Hmmm, teach both sides of the issue. Well what are the two sides? Evolution and Creationism? Who's creationism? Ever ask Inuit, or the Aboriginals on the origins of the Universe? You see these folks still very much believe in their legends. Who is to say that they are not right, and the Christian's wrong?
You see here is where Christian creationists loose the argument, and why I stopped believing in religion. The creationists say everything came from God. Yet when somebody else says otherwise they are wrong, and yet they cannot give a logical argument on why they are wrong.
Lets play the argument this way. I say the aboriginals and Inuit are right on the origins of the universe and world. Why? They have been able to live on this planet without destroying themselves. Remember pollution, species extinction, and other ills have been the result of the white man!
I rather like the shuffle because I excercise daily. The IPod or IPod mini is too big and bulky. The Shuffle is perfect and because it plays in random mode it is great that no song will be repeated too quickly.
Here is how I use the shuffle. Load up the device with songs for your mood. Then excercise, but that might take 45 minutes or an hour and a half. Repeat for six or seven times. At the end of the week reload with new songs.
If you don't like the shuffle, well the shuffle is not for you. It is for me for people who literally count the grams that they have to carry when they are out and about.
If I had mod points I would definitely mod you up. I get VERY SICK and tired of this attitude that you must have a single experience.
If that were the case we would have only one car maker, one set of clothes, one TV, one VCR maker, etc. Gee we would have COMMUNISM!!!!
These days most operating systems work similarily (windows, buttons, etc), just like most cars work similarily (gear shift, steering wheel, gas pedal, etc). However every person shifting from one car to another TAKES a moment to figure out where the buttons and levers are.
The worst part regarding this critique is that there is always OSX, which is pretty darn good and lets me run essentially all Open Source software.
> Again, go ahead and argue with me if you want; I won't even bother reading it.
And we have to endure reading you? You see this is one of those things that bothers me about the debates these days. Instead of trying to find a compromise we are in a screaming match on who can scream loudest WITHOUT listening to the other person.
So here I go rambling with my own off-topic ideas....
There is a public interest, and often some people represent the public interest. So the original poster is probably not that far off the mark
Now regarding patents... >>> I'm not going to get into yet another stupid argument over them, but I will state my opinion: Patents are good things.
Gee, you scream "I am not going to listen to you and I am going to give my opion".
Likewise I will do the same and ramble my thoughts. Patents are legal monopolies that protect a unique idea. Sounds good, but it misses the obvious point, there are not that many unique ideas as there are patents granted! Humanity is not unique! We are only as smart as predecessors! So how can you patent something where the basis was created by somebody else? As a patent holder will you give those people who provided you with the knowledge money? My point is nobody lives in a vaccum.
Lets consider the following perspective, in a world of globalization there will be multiple people that will come up with the same idea. It is because our evolutionary nature of ideas. Yet one can get a patent and the other not! Why not? They both came to the same idea and yet one is considered a copy cat! Ooops, sorry beep wrong answer.
Patents do not protect markets because if you look at some of the most competitive and richest markets they HAVE NO protection from patents. Examples include, cars, software (before the scams), food receipes (cooking, etc), movies, music, etc. Patents cause more problems than they are worth.
I do fully endorse copyright, however with less length. My thinking is along the lines, life of creator + 15 years. I agree with DRM, but on an optional basis. DRM should not be shoved down our throats.
I think the comment of Marx vs Franklin is not fair. For example, did the researcher happen to consider how many bookcases of information that there would be for Adolph Hitler? I am sure that you could fill an entire library just on that single topic.
And to put things in context, Franklin was a great man, but Marx for good or bad was larger. Franklin affected the United States and made it what it is today. But Marx affected the entire world, as "The Commie Father". There is a bit of a difference. Whom would interest me? Franklin hands down, but I would not think that the librarians would want me to read about Marx instead of Franklin.
Frankly, I think librarians are not putting any filter in place, and only presenting ALL of the information, not what a select group considers good or bad.
Getting back to the article, I do tend to agree with the general idea that we are becoming a fast food people who just gobble information without thinking of where the information came from and what it represents.
I was reading National Geographic and they were talking about climate change. One of their opinions was that climate change is already underway. Essentially the switch was flipped some fifty or so years ago.
They also said that climate change happens and that's a fact of life. For example the downfall of the Egyptian empire was partially due to a massive warm spell that caused crops to fail and deserts to form. Ironically the article pointed out that there were no cars at that time.
The traditional logic is that once Microsoft has attained enough market share prices will go up. Well, nope that is not what I seem to see happen. What I see happening is even more devious.
Microsoft enters a market and calculates a sweet price, a price where people will buy the product. Then it keeps that price and increases to cover inflation. Is there anything wrong with this? Absolutely! The problem is that Microsoft does not lower their prices after that.
In a normal market prices drop once new versions enter the market, etc, etc. Take a look at computers, cars, houses (not the properties, but building materials) and prices do drop.
Where prices do not drop is in controlled markets, like what Microsoft has, and what the music or film industry has. Also want to see another thing about these markets? There are some who make damm big bucks and tons of people who are just eecking out a living.
How do you change this? Consumers have the power to choose and they should use Open Source, buy "B rated" DVD's, and buy directly from unknown artists.
Re:I hate college
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It is an interesting point you mention. Ok, having a degree in engineering tends me to think that Google is right. HOWEVER, it used to be back in the good old days that if you did not have a degree work experience did count for something.
Frankly if Google does not interview somebody because of a degree they are being silly. Remember Bill Gates, the man without a degree! Exceptions exist all the time. However, this Google attitude does not surprise me. For example I still to this day cannot get a Google email account. Gee I suppose even though I have a degree I am still a nobody! At least my Yahoo account still works for the past SEVEN YEARS!
I am glad you mentioned this because this is where the system has caused massive failures. Here in Europe Truckers have been tracked for decades. In the early days it started with a time/speed, etc tracker that is installed, and now it is GPS, etc.
What happened? It has made the trucking industry more dangerous than ever. The problem is that when businesses control every move it forces the people to cheat. Truckers in Europe are "hinted" by their bosses to break the rules to keep competitive. Truckers will drive too long using equipment that often is a hazard to the road.
The problem with GPS systems is that initially there will be a gain, and then a future collapse. Lets say you install GPS, and get a 100% productivity gain. Great, for one year you do well. Then in the next year what do you do? Companies will always want productivity gains. What do you do when there is nothing to be gained? For example, you cannot carry out a pregancy with nine women in one month.
So do companies buy new trucks? Do they install better processes? Nope, the problem is that many industries are mature and as efficient as it will get. Yet the shareholders are telling the managers to become "productive".
Hmm, interesting question. Ok, so lets say that you are driving. You delivered five packages out of fifteen. The first five packages took most of the morning. Because of where the packages are delivered you decide to take an early lunch because there is a restaurant you like. Then after lunch you deliver most of the packages. Here's the question because you took an early lunch does not mean you are not doing your job.
Here is another example, you are very efficient at your job, and because of it can take a long lunch hour. Your boss realizes this and decides to give you more packages than somebody who is slower. However, instead of increasing your pay you just get more packages. Is that fair?
My point is that I don't agree with the big brother, and I don't think the teamsters are much better. But it does not give a company the right to watch your every move.
I find many people very hypocritical in this aspect. Especially managers and IT people. Imagine you were tracked like a UPS agent? Imagine your boss installing applications to see how much code you write per hour and minute. Imagine your boss watching your every click on the computer? Would you buy into that?
Yet it is OK to for UPS to watch THEIR trucks and equipment. The problem with these attitudes is that does not work. You cannot control people and expect efficiency. Control results in resentment because pure numerical facts are used to judge whether or not an individual is doing their job. Humans are not robots, as there are always circumstances.
Sorry, but I did not make myself clear. I am not saying that everything has been patented. I am saying that the patent was to protect "copiers". The problem is that we are six billion people.
When you have six billion people, multiple people will be thinking the same thing. However, the patent system is based on the fact that only one person will be thinking of the idea. So now comes the question, why should somebody who came up with the same idea not also get a patent? This is my problem with the patent system.
I replied about the money issue to another poster. But my point is that to get a patent that can stand up in court you need those monies. About forty years ago you could write a patent by hand. Now you need a lawyer. If you don't then you will pay for it when defending the patent.
You are right in theory. Try defending your "hand written" patent in a court of law! Been there, done that, and got the t-shirt. You need a lawyer, if you have anything worth patenting for larger sums of money.
But I am glad you point this out. The original intent was to allow the little person to profit from patents. However, the legions of lawyers will make mince meat of you if you try to defend your patent. So what do big companies do? Simple, "I will pay you X and you give me the patent". If you try to say no they will bury you in the courts.
That is such a pile of BS! Patents do not protect little guys from the big guys. That is a figment of our imagination. Maybe 100 years ago that was the case, but it is definitely not the case today.
To file a patent you need a lawyer, which costs money, then you need more money to defend your patent. A patent in North America costs about 20K USD, and in Europe 40K Euro's. The only "little" people who can do this are lawyers themselves. Notice how many times Slashdot covers the story of a small company with a broad patent? And notice how those small companies are lawyer driven. That is the reality folks!
Patents need to undergo a radical change because the premise of a patent is that a single person comes up with a single unique thought that is not obvious. Well, that is impossible in this day and age!
Slashdot Mirror
You are missing the issue. Sure the 300 million people would be easy to target, but that's missing the point. Imagine the uproar of any country that decided to kill 100 million people? You would have a bloody world war.
Starvation, transportation, boats, and fuel. Come on people can feed themselves. It just needs to be organized. And why do you assume that they all of the sudden decide to drive? Why could they not walk and trucks carry the supplies?
What I say is not impossible, and what the problem is that people in the Western world do not think it is possible. However, in many other parts of the world people need quite a bit less and can get along with simpler solutions.
Why is this considered insightful? Is this really protectionism? Frankly would any government buy military from another country if they did not have to?
When was the last time that military powers like the US, Russia, England, France bought something from other countries? Outside of the screws that hold everything together not at all!
Outside of the government there is trade and countries do buy products from other countries, and from subsidaries of companies from other countries.
Now about outsourcing for lawyers, I am sure it will happen. Politicians not being outsourced, well that is YOUR OWN DAMM FAULT! Polticians happen to be citizens of the country they represent. Very few voters have yet to vote on a foreigner! I suppose it defeats the purpose of voting, and citizenship, no?
Police? Well, how in tarnations is a cop going to investigate a crime scene when they are thousands of km/miles away.
Want to know something. Imagine 300 million Chinese decided one day to the next to pick and leave. There would still be 1.2 billion living in the country. This "little" group walks through Siberia, and then reaches Alaska. So Alaska will have 300 million people knocking on their door. What is the US going to do? Bomb them? Yeah, right! You might as well just bomb all of Alaska while you are at it. There are 300 million people saying let me in, and there is not a darn thing you or anybody can do about it!
Frankly the Far East is the power of the 21'th century, as I sit here in the Western "Civilized" world.
Yes you get quality news in Slashdot and blogs. You wanna know why? Because there is critique. Maybe the article itself might be leaning one way or another, but the comments will provide the necessary explanations or corrections.
I find Slashdot fascinating because of the comments. Yes there are idiots, but there are also very intelligent people making intelligent comments. Where do you get that in newspapers? Newspapers have a single editor (or small team) with certain slants.
Take for example anything that Fox news produces. There is a slant in their news. Can anybody critique the comments Fox news has made? No, because they control the medium and the reactions. With Slashdot and Blogs that is simply not the case. Slashdot and blogs represent the voices of the people! And after all is that not what the news is all about, the people?
Here is a scenario. You fly from London to Los Angeles. Of course it is a brand new AirBus 380. This one has seats for 800. At the same time a flight comes from Tokyo, and five other destinations. So at the same time we have 5600 people landing!
One word, [sarcasm]Wonderful[/sarcasm]. LAX is slow enough, but with these beasts in the air you might as well forget getting out of the airport in less than two hours.
On this one Boeing has the right answer. The problem is that the infrastructure is not equipped to deal with these planes. The hubs are already busy enough. Forget about expanding the hubs as that will take years, and years...
No, welcome to cattle country, ladies and gentlemen...
Living in Switzerland, and having lived in Germany, I will disagree with you. If you live near Koeln sure you can't move five meters. However, I was living in Southern Germany and former east Germany and there is still plenty of stretchs to put the pedal to the metal. In fact I could often do 250KPH. My car could do faster, but it is limited.
This is exactly the kind of propaganda governments like to spew.
1) Yes there are citizens who drive fast and follow too close. Just like there are citizens who smoke, eat too much, don't excercise, fart and burp in public. FACE reality, that is called humanity.
2) Speeding tickets has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with making money in the government. Don't believe me? Check the revenue at the local law enforcement office.
3) Hazardous driving like following too close, passing too tightly, which is on the books of as illegal, has no revenue stream. Yet these actions themselves are highly dangerous and CAUSE accidents. Why are cops not checking for these infractions? Simple, it means WORK, and the revenue earned is less than the effort required. Meaning its not a cash cow.
4) Highway speeds are way too low. Why is it that in Germany you can drive as fast as you can, Switzerland is 120 KPH, Austria 130 KPH, France 130 KPH, Canada 100 KPH, and the US 90-110 KPH? So that means driving by the books in Germany gets you speed tickets most other places, driving by the book in France and Austria will get you tickets in Canada and the US? Come on, these are artificial limits setup so that MOST people people end up speeding.
These days cars and highways for a large part have become safe enough for 150-160 KPH. And with electronic signs in many countries aspeed limit can be altered reflecting the conditions on the highway. Why is this not enforced? Simple, speed tickets = cash cow = simple way of saying, "We are tough on accidents". BS, BS, BS!!!
You are right in that there are two sides. However, I think it is more "Freedom to drive like an idiot". After all we are humans, humans that cherish freedom above everything else. As a friend says to me, average means that 50% of the people are dumber than you. But it also means that they have the right to be dumber than you and you can't do anything about it!
I think what would bother me regarding the UAE deal is that it will be VERY one sided. Do you REALLY think that any UAE citizen, or any UAE royal family member will get speeding tickets? When pigs fly!
But I agree, I would would pull it off my car and throw it somewhere....
I never said that Tridge did or did not violate any license. In fact I agree with you. Why did you think I was disagreeing with you?
What I was referring to is that BitKeeper is annoyed at something that they should have seen coming. Frankly Bitkeeper is here at fault and not Tridge!
This thinking I find funny. Lets say that Microsoft gave a free product, and then later charged money. There would be hell to raise, including statements like, "See I told you the evil borg had a hidden agenda".
Well, bitkeeper did a bait and switch with the Linux kernel and that is NOT funny! Bitkeeper should have known this and not made the offer in the first place, and Linus should not have accepted the offer!
In this one situation Linus and Bitkeeper screwed up, and made a bad decision that impacts something that many many people rely on!
I regularly use three platforms; Windows, Linux (Fedora) and OSX. Conclusion? I cringe at having to use Windows. I find that once you learn UNIX it is faster to get anything done. Albeit you have to learn UNIX.
Now having said that, what I see more off are peacock articles. All fluff and very little facts because the three operating systems are TOO similar. Compare it to cars. These days all of the cars are good enough! They will last four years without too many problems. So then how do you distinguish yourself? Write articles like a peacock struts its feathers, all emotional.
The easiest way to illustrate this peacock argument is to take a bushman from the jungle and get them to figure out what a computer does. Without helping them. My guess is that the bushman will have a hard time figuring out what the mouse is for. Most likely they will use the mouse as a slingshot and head back into the jungle. I am not saying that bushmen are dumb. I am saying that computers require some upfront learning time regardless of the OS used.
Hmmm, teach both sides of the issue. Well what are the two sides? Evolution and Creationism? Who's creationism? Ever ask Inuit, or the Aboriginals on the origins of the Universe? You see these folks still very much believe in their legends. Who is to say that they are not right, and the Christian's wrong?
You see here is where Christian creationists loose the argument, and why I stopped believing in religion. The creationists say everything came from God. Yet when somebody else says otherwise they are wrong, and yet they cannot give a logical argument on why they are wrong.
Lets play the argument this way. I say the aboriginals and Inuit are right on the origins of the universe and world. Why? They have been able to live on this planet without destroying themselves. Remember pollution, species extinction, and other ills have been the result of the white man!
I rather like the shuffle because I excercise daily. The IPod or IPod mini is too big and bulky. The Shuffle is perfect and because it plays in random mode it is great that no song will be repeated too quickly.
Here is how I use the shuffle. Load up the device with songs for your mood. Then excercise, but that might take 45 minutes or an hour and a half. Repeat for six or seven times. At the end of the week reload with new songs.
If you don't like the shuffle, well the shuffle is not for you. It is for me for people who literally count the grams that they have to carry when they are out and about.
From what I heard, they are NOT scrapping the Win32 API. And .NET will continue to be a bolt on...
Now about the Open API, not so sure on that...
If I had mod points I would definitely mod you up. I get VERY SICK and tired of this attitude that you must have a single experience.
If that were the case we would have only one car maker, one set of clothes, one TV, one VCR maker, etc. Gee we would have COMMUNISM!!!!
These days most operating systems work similarily (windows, buttons, etc), just like most cars work similarily (gear shift, steering wheel, gas pedal, etc). However every person shifting from one car to another TAKES a moment to figure out where the buttons and levers are.
The worst part regarding this critique is that there is always OSX, which is pretty darn good and lets me run essentially all Open Source software.
> Again, go ahead and argue with me if you want; I won't even bother reading it.
And we have to endure reading you? You see this is one of those things that bothers me about the debates these days. Instead of trying to find a compromise we are in a screaming match on who can scream loudest WITHOUT listening to the other person.
So here I go rambling with my own off-topic ideas....
There is a public interest, and often some people represent the public interest. So the original poster is probably not that far off the mark
Now regarding patents...
>>> I'm not going to get into yet another stupid argument over them, but I will state my opinion: Patents are good things.
Gee, you scream "I am not going to listen to you and I am going to give my opion".
Likewise I will do the same and ramble my thoughts. Patents are legal monopolies that protect a unique idea. Sounds good, but it misses the obvious point, there are not that many unique ideas as there are patents granted! Humanity is not unique! We are only as smart as predecessors! So how can you patent something where the basis was created by somebody else? As a patent holder will you give those people who provided you with the knowledge money? My point is nobody lives in a vaccum.
Lets consider the following perspective, in a world of globalization there will be multiple people that will come up with the same idea. It is because our evolutionary nature of ideas. Yet one can get a patent and the other not! Why not? They both came to the same idea and yet one is considered a copy cat! Ooops, sorry beep wrong answer.
Patents do not protect markets because if you look at some of the most competitive and richest markets they HAVE NO protection from patents. Examples include, cars, software (before the scams), food receipes (cooking, etc), movies, music, etc. Patents cause more problems than they are worth.
I do fully endorse copyright, however with less length. My thinking is along the lines, life of creator + 15 years. I agree with DRM, but on an optional basis. DRM should not be shoved down our throats.
I think the comment of Marx vs Franklin is not fair. For example, did the researcher happen to consider how many bookcases of information that there would be for Adolph Hitler? I am sure that you could fill an entire library just on that single topic.
And to put things in context, Franklin was a great man, but Marx for good or bad was larger. Franklin affected the United States and made it what it is today. But Marx affected the entire world, as "The Commie Father". There is a bit of a difference. Whom would interest me? Franklin hands down, but I would not think that the librarians would want me to read about Marx instead of Franklin.
Frankly, I think librarians are not putting any filter in place, and only presenting ALL of the information, not what a select group considers good or bad.
Getting back to the article, I do tend to agree with the general idea that we are becoming a fast food people who just gobble information without thinking of where the information came from and what it represents.
I was reading National Geographic and they were talking about climate change. One of their opinions was that climate change is already underway. Essentially the switch was flipped some fifty or so years ago.
They also said that climate change happens and that's a fact of life. For example the downfall of the Egyptian empire was partially due to a massive warm spell that caused crops to fail and deserts to form. Ironically the article pointed out that there were no cars at that time.
The traditional logic is that once Microsoft has attained enough market share prices will go up. Well, nope that is not what I seem to see happen. What I see happening is even more devious.
Microsoft enters a market and calculates a sweet price, a price where people will buy the product. Then it keeps that price and increases to cover inflation. Is there anything wrong with this? Absolutely! The problem is that Microsoft does not lower their prices after that.
In a normal market prices drop once new versions enter the market, etc, etc. Take a look at computers, cars, houses (not the properties, but building materials) and prices do drop.
Where prices do not drop is in controlled markets, like what Microsoft has, and what the music or film industry has. Also want to see another thing about these markets? There are some who make damm big bucks and tons of people who are just eecking out a living.
How do you change this? Consumers have the power to choose and they should use Open Source, buy "B rated" DVD's, and buy directly from unknown artists.
It is an interesting point you mention. Ok, having a degree in engineering tends me to think that Google is right. HOWEVER, it used to be back in the good old days that if you did not have a degree work experience did count for something.
Frankly if Google does not interview somebody because of a degree they are being silly. Remember Bill Gates, the man without a degree! Exceptions exist all the time. However, this Google attitude does not surprise me. For example I still to this day cannot get a Google email account. Gee I suppose even though I have a degree I am still a nobody! At least my Yahoo account still works for the past SEVEN YEARS!
I am glad you mentioned this because this is where the system has caused massive failures. Here in Europe Truckers have been tracked for decades. In the early days it started with a time/speed, etc tracker that is installed, and now it is GPS, etc.
What happened? It has made the trucking industry more dangerous than ever. The problem is that when businesses control every move it forces the people to cheat. Truckers in Europe are "hinted" by their bosses to break the rules to keep competitive. Truckers will drive too long using equipment that often is a hazard to the road.
The problem with GPS systems is that initially there will be a gain, and then a future collapse. Lets say you install GPS, and get a 100% productivity gain. Great, for one year you do well. Then in the next year what do you do? Companies will always want productivity gains. What do you do when there is nothing to be gained? For example, you cannot carry out a pregancy with nine women in one month.
So do companies buy new trucks? Do they install better processes? Nope, the problem is that many industries are mature and as efficient as it will get. Yet the shareholders are telling the managers to become "productive".
Hmm, interesting question. Ok, so lets say that you are driving. You delivered five packages out of fifteen. The first five packages took most of the morning. Because of where the packages are delivered you decide to take an early lunch because there is a restaurant you like. Then after lunch you deliver most of the packages. Here's the question because you took an early lunch does not mean you are not doing your job.
Here is another example, you are very efficient at your job, and because of it can take a long lunch hour. Your boss realizes this and decides to give you more packages than somebody who is slower. However, instead of increasing your pay you just get more packages. Is that fair?
My point is that I don't agree with the big brother, and I don't think the teamsters are much better. But it does not give a company the right to watch your every move.
I find many people very hypocritical in this aspect. Especially managers and IT people. Imagine you were tracked like a UPS agent? Imagine your boss installing applications to see how much code you write per hour and minute. Imagine your boss watching your every click on the computer? Would you buy into that?
Yet it is OK to for UPS to watch THEIR trucks and equipment. The problem with these attitudes is that does not work. You cannot control people and expect efficiency. Control results in resentment because pure numerical facts are used to judge whether or not an individual is doing their job.
Humans are not robots, as there are always circumstances.
Sorry, but I did not make myself clear. I am not saying that everything has been patented. I am saying that the patent was to protect "copiers". The problem is that we are six billion people.
When you have six billion people, multiple people will be thinking the same thing. However, the patent system is based on the fact that only one person will be thinking of the idea. So now comes the question, why should somebody who came up with the same idea not also get a patent? This is my problem with the patent system.
I replied about the money issue to another poster. But my point is that to get a patent that can stand up in court you need those monies. About forty years ago you could write a patent by hand. Now you need a lawyer. If you don't then you will pay for it when defending the patent.
You are right in theory. Try defending your "hand written" patent in a court of law! Been there, done that, and got the t-shirt. You need a lawyer, if you have anything worth patenting for larger sums of money.
But I am glad you point this out. The original intent was to allow the little person to profit from patents. However, the legions of lawyers will make mince meat of you if you try to defend your patent. So what do big companies do? Simple, "I will pay you X and you give me the patent". If you try to say no they will bury you in the courts.
That is such a pile of BS! Patents do not protect little guys from the big guys. That is a figment of our imagination. Maybe 100 years ago that was the case, but it is definitely not the case today.
To file a patent you need a lawyer, which costs money, then you need more money to defend your patent. A patent in North America costs about 20K USD, and in Europe 40K Euro's. The only "little" people who can do this are lawyers themselves. Notice how many times Slashdot covers the story of a small company with a broad patent? And notice how those small companies are lawyer driven. That is the reality folks!
Patents need to undergo a radical change because the premise of a patent is that a single person comes up with a single unique thought that is not obvious. Well, that is impossible in this day and age!