Release dates for open source projects are more honest. They say beta or alpha when they really mean beta or alpha, and they say release when it actually works.
Most proprietary software fails for reasons that manufacturing failed in the 1980s. Top down, hieararchical processes simply do not work. You need to have cross functional teams, have a quality culture that allows developers to take risks and the initiative, and interact directly with requirements. Most of today's processes simply don't do that, preferring instead to build software in the same way that GM used to build cars. We get buggy bloated software that is unreliable for the same reason that we used to get buggy bloated cars that are unreliable, because the process that builds them stink!
a) encrypted traffic b) end users that do get sued to broadcast knowledge of suspicious IP addressses across the network
If that does not work,
then, trade names and home addresses of lawyers that sue on behalf of these companies. Ya may not win in court but you could at least go kick their ass.
Really, that's the big issue for MS. There is another OS that is free. IF MS dropped Windows development and switched all their applications to Linux, they might make their earnings targets.
It is with my heart full of hope that I write personalyl to you. I am a member of Microsoft and during some recent turmoil, we misplaced 45 billion dollars. You can claim this...
To get.NET to scale that well, you must absolutely forget about IIS and web technologies for the server and use.NET remoting for your middle tier and have your client be a WinForms application..NET remoting is easy to set up, easy to program, and, it is MUCH MUCH faster than using web services.
MSMQ is geared for solving problems of disconnected delivery and total quality of service. You pay for those guarantees in performance. The best implementation I've heard of roughly runs in the hundred or so messages per second, and to get that you have to use threads..NET isn't playing too well with MSMQ yet. You should understand your application carefully before you use MSMQ. Many people that think they need it don't. On the flip side, many people that don't think they need it do.
Arguments about whether or not copying hurts the recording industry are completely irrelevant. We live in a capitalist society. If technological progress creates a landscape where the recording industry cannot exist any longer, then, goodbye recording industry.
Plenty of businesses get "hurt" by technological advance. By your logic we ought to ban computers because of the all the damage done to the typewriter industry, or perhaps the horse and buggy vendors from 1900s are entitled to sue Detroit for damages because they were hurt by all of those cars.
So, f--- the record company. Time's changed. Turning the government into the record company's monkey is not going to change the fact that we have machines that are really good at copying stuff and people ought to use them.
Why should the government interfere in protecting the jobs of artists and record company executives?
They are simply obsolete, just as American programmers getting sent to India are, just as American welders are, or guys that used to grow corn with a horse and plow, rather than a tractor.
Propping up the record companies and recording artists with legislation is no different than a farm subsidy.
Come on you capitalist. Let the market do its work without government interference, that's what we're saying. DMCA is anti-free market.
Might makes right, and, it's against the law, are stupid.
How about this. The record company sends an attorney to deliver a subpoena to someone suspected of copying files, and that person shoots the attorney.
Really, the whole might makes right argument falls flat on its face when 20 years from now we will all be able to have our weapons of mass destruction. If RIAA busts me swapping files when I'm 75 and drooling, I'll just nuke the sons of bitches.
Ok, this argument is: Do something that somebody doesn't like, and, because they might kick my ass, that makes what I'm doing morally wrong.
So, how about this.
Someone doesn't like the color red. You drive a red car, and that person smashes your windows and shoots you in the spine. Now, does that mean that driving a red car is wrong, or that the other guy is a lunatic.
Or, to use the "it's the law" corallary.
Blue paint manufacturers conspire to put a duty on red paint. They hire a Phd to find out reasons why red paint is dangerous. They then create a pseudo organization called "citizens for a safe america", and they create such a popular uproar that a texas chimp trumpets jesus and the virtues of blue paint and wins the presidency. "wow, red is really dangerous". They go and ban red paint and the next thing you know, it is "against the law" to drive a car with red paint.
Moral of the story: "It's against the law", and "someone might kick my ass stories", are the two dumbest supporting evidence arguments ever made.
"Against the law". That's not morally wrong. If you are so naive as to think the law is the same as morality, then you've forfeited democracy.
My next paycheck is direct deposit. If you take it, you would be stealing it, and not only would you be breaking the law, and I would burn your house down.
Doesn't the RIAA have exactly the same number of songs, artists, money in the bank, after someone makes a copy of a song? How is it theft when they never lost anything?
It is not stealing to copy.
Is copying a breach of contract or license to use a work? Yes, but breaching a contract is not morally wrong, otherwise, corporations might actually tell the truth.
The music industry is using the same exact argument that religious institutions make. They argue that society should give them special perks by saying that hurting those institutions is morally wrong.
You don't need no stinking priest to find your god, and you don't need to stinking middle man recording executive to get a song.
The greatest irony of our times it that the two most diametrically oppossed institutions in terms of ideal are completely the same after all. The religious nuts want the right to control information, and so does the recording industry. The RIAA and the 700 Club (or whatever he's onto now), are both the same thing, just in it for the power, add no value to anything, hamper the rights of users in order to stay in power, collecting a tax for delivering nothing. Both institutions are obsolete.
Time to step up to the brave new world.
Intellectual property doesn't matter because your ideas have been thought of or are obsolete.
If someone walks into my store and takes a record, they deprived me of my inventory.
If someone makes a copy of my song, I still have it, and they have it.
There is a difference that RIAA and others of their ilk try to paper over it. Theft means to deprive someone else of their property. Copying does not do that, therefor, it is not theft.
Does the technology f--- up their business model? Sure it does! But, does that mean that they should have a right to enact a public monopoly and empower government to keep their antiquated thoughts intact? We have machines that make it easy to copy information, and therefor, we don't need institutions to dole it out any more. The recording industry and media in general is completely obsolete.
For musicians to try and say that copyright is a moral right is no different than the Catholic Church of the middle ages fighting the renaissance. Both institutions are trying to claim exclusivity on the control of information, using the circular argument that if they don't have control, they will be damaged. Any institution that exists for its own sake and not for some greater public good must be ruthlessly kicked down. The Catholic Church was stomped down, and so should be Music industry.
All this talk about civil rights from the Democrats is crap if they don't want to repeal USA Patriot and abolish the Dept of Homeland Security.
If Dean promises to do that, he has this Republican dollar, no matter what else he stands for. But, Dems won't, and so, this election is already going to be about whose going be running the American Empire that no one wants, rather than, is the Empire right or wrong.
Come on lefties.. this is the issue you've been waiting for.
But honestly, all I really want is a sane political leader, for once, and not some goddamned cartoon.
Note though that while I say that we should not trust the Islamic states as far as we could throw one, that is not the same as saying that we should have a war with them. Far better is to put some form of alternative energy down with them, then unlink ourselves from trade with them, until they decide to at least advance out to the renaissance. For the price of the Iraqi occupation alone, we could be farther along in trying to build a working fusion reactor.
a) The moorish invasion of spain was justifiable to this day by many islamic people on usenet. They argued that spain was backwards and islam helped it. I said see this is why US can invade Iraq, because they are backwards... lol.
b) western christianity and islam are guilty of similar crimes. the egyptian gods were wiped off the map when egypt became an islamic state. western christianity had a reformation though and thus was born the idea that religion is not the ultimate answer to everything and out of that came separation of church and state.
c) there's not even any popular support for church and state separation in the middle east. you think republicans are bad because they want to put god and reagan on everything, just imagine a land where 95% of the people actually think that way, and support things like beheadings for crimes, where women are not allowed to drive, banks not being allowed to charge interest, etc.
Like, if you are suspicious of the American right wing, then how can you not be even trebly suspicious at the islamic right wing, which does daily burn americans in effigy, does daily refer to us as the great satan, etc...?
I just don't understand the logical disconnect. Just because they are not white christians does not mean that they are saints!
Doesn't western music work on a fairly small set of notes coupled by some power of 2 fraction of a second to indicate spacing?
It ought to be possible to write a simple application that creates a random song and copywrites it... distribute it enough, and then, pretty much every song that RIAA publishes would infringe.
Or, depending on how copyright law works, you could programatically generate all possible songs as a single song, and then copywrite that. Then, any new song would infringe upon your song, and the recording industry has to pony up.
The music industry has a problem in that it is a lot easier to programmatically generate music than it is programmatically generate visual arts. If you have computers making music, even randomly, you can pretty much torpedo the notion of intellectual property becuase a brute force generation of notes on a distributed internet will simply outpace the less numerous and less efficient human musicians.
Islam has been trying to take over the world since it was founded. What they are trying to do today is the same thing they were trying to do 300,500, 700, and 1000, even 1250 years ago.
To say that the United States can somehow "win the Islamic people" over is to overlook the fact that in their eyes we are decadent sinners. While we could be nicer to them, that isn't going to help us in the long run. Our destiny in their eyes is to ultimately be converted to Islam.
Goggles for gardening. Shows you how deep to cut hole, which branches to prune.
Goggles for repairing things. Car broke down, need to fix breaks? With the goggles you'll be able to do it yourself, no problem.
Goggles for battlefield medicine. Quick, your buddy's arm just got blown off. He's gonna die in minutes and the medics are dead. Put on goggles and at least give it a shot.
Handwriting recognition would have to be good. So you could do stuff have the goggles point out mistakes as you are doing your calculus homework.
Slashdot Mirror
Release dates for open source projects are more honest. They say beta or alpha when they really mean beta or alpha, and they say release when it actually works.
Most proprietary software fails for reasons that manufacturing failed in the 1980s. Top down, hieararchical processes simply do not work. You need to have cross functional teams, have a quality culture that allows developers to take risks and the initiative, and interact directly with requirements. Most of today's processes simply don't do that, preferring instead to build software in the same way that GM used to build cars. We get buggy bloated software that is unreliable for the same reason that we used to get buggy bloated cars that are unreliable, because the process that builds them stink!
Should have a P2P network that allows:
a) encrypted traffic
b) end users that do get sued to broadcast knowledge of suspicious IP addressses across the network
If that does not work,
then, trade names and home addresses of lawyers that sue on behalf of these companies. Ya may not win in court but you could at least go kick their ass.
Really, that's the big issue for MS. There is another OS that is free. IF MS dropped Windows development and switched all their applications to Linux, they might make their earnings targets.
IMPORTANT
DeAR Sir,
It is with my heart full of hope that I write personalyl to you. I am a member of Microsoft and during some recent turmoil, we misplaced 45 billion dollars. You can claim this
To get
MSMQ is geared for solving problems of disconnected delivery and total quality of service. You pay for those guarantees in performance. The best implementation I've heard of roughly runs in the hundred or so messages per second, and to get that you have to use threads.
Arguments about whether or not copying hurts the recording industry are completely irrelevant. We live in a capitalist society. If technological progress creates a landscape where the recording industry cannot exist any longer, then, goodbye recording industry.
Plenty of businesses get "hurt" by technological advance. By your logic we ought to ban computers because of the all the damage done to the typewriter industry, or perhaps the horse and buggy vendors from 1900s are entitled to sue Detroit for damages because they were hurt by all of those cars.
So, f--- the record company. Time's changed. Turning the government into the record company's monkey is not going to change the fact that we have machines that are really good at copying stuff and people ought to use them.
Silly me.
How much more proof do you need that corporate leaders are out to get you?
Revolution is the only answer.
Why should the government interfere in protecting the jobs of artists and record company executives?
They are simply obsolete, just as American programmers getting sent to India are, just as American welders are, or guys that used to grow corn with a horse and plow, rather than a tractor.
Propping up the record companies and recording artists with legislation is no different than a farm subsidy.
Come on you capitalist. Let the market do its work without government interference, that's what we're saying. DMCA is anti-free market.
Might makes right, and, it's against the law, are stupid.
How about this. The record company sends an attorney to deliver a subpoena to someone suspected of copying files, and that person shoots the attorney.
Really, the whole might makes right argument falls flat on its face when 20 years from now we will all be able to have our weapons of mass destruction. If RIAA busts me swapping files when I'm 75 and drooling, I'll just nuke the sons of bitches.
Ok, this argument is: Do something that somebody doesn't like, and, because they might kick my ass, that makes what I'm doing morally wrong.
So, how about this.
Someone doesn't like the color red. You drive a red car, and that person smashes your windows and shoots you in the spine. Now, does that mean that driving a red car is wrong, or that the other guy is a lunatic.
Or, to use the "it's the law" corallary.
Blue paint manufacturers conspire to put a duty on red paint. They hire a Phd to find out reasons why red paint is dangerous. They then create a pseudo organization called "citizens for a safe america", and they create such a popular uproar that a texas chimp trumpets jesus and the virtues of blue paint and wins the presidency. "wow, red is really dangerous". They go and ban red paint and the next thing you know, it is "against the law" to drive a car with red paint.
Moral of the story: "It's against the law", and "someone might kick my ass stories", are the two dumbest supporting evidence arguments ever made.
"Against the law". That's not morally wrong. If you are so naive as to think the law is the same as morality, then you've forfeited democracy.
My next paycheck is direct deposit. If you take it, you would be stealing it, and not only would you be breaking the law, and I would burn your house down.
Doesn't the RIAA have exactly the same number of songs, artists, money in the bank, after someone makes a copy of a song? How is it theft when they never lost anything?
It is not stealing to copy.
Is copying a breach of contract or license to use a work? Yes, but breaching a contract is not morally wrong, otherwise, corporations might actually tell the truth.
Which Royal will be caught having an affair with it?
But they got good at it. Even if Indian programmers suck right now, they will get better. It's just a matter of time.
Soon we will all be getting paid $1000 / mo.
The music industry is using the same exact argument that religious institutions make. They argue that society should give them special perks by saying that hurting those institutions is morally wrong.
You don't need no stinking priest to find your god, and you don't need to stinking middle man recording executive to get a song.
The greatest irony of our times it that the two most diametrically oppossed institutions in terms of ideal are completely the same after all. The religious nuts want the right to control information, and so does the recording industry. The RIAA and the 700 Club (or whatever he's onto now), are both the same thing, just in it for the power, add no value to anything, hamper the rights of users in order to stay in power, collecting a tax for delivering nothing. Both institutions are obsolete.
Time to step up to the brave new world.
Intellectual property doesn't matter because your ideas have been thought of or are obsolete.
If someone walks into my store and takes a record, they deprived me of my inventory.
If someone makes a copy of my song, I still have it, and they have it.
There is a difference that RIAA and others of their ilk try to paper over it. Theft means to deprive someone else of their property. Copying does not do that, therefor, it is not theft.
Does the technology f--- up their business model? Sure it does! But, does that mean that they should have a right to enact a public monopoly and empower government to keep their antiquated thoughts intact? We have machines that make it easy to copy information, and therefor, we don't need institutions to dole it out any more. The recording industry and media in general is completely obsolete.
For musicians to try and say that copyright is a moral right is no different than the Catholic Church of the middle ages fighting the renaissance. Both institutions are trying to claim exclusivity on the control of information, using the circular argument that if they don't have control, they will be damaged. Any institution that exists for its own sake and not for some greater public good must be ruthlessly kicked down. The Catholic Church was stomped down, and so should be Music industry.
All this talk about civil rights from the Democrats is crap if they don't want to repeal USA Patriot and abolish the Dept of Homeland Security.
If Dean promises to do that, he has this Republican dollar, no matter what else he stands for. But, Dems won't, and so, this election is already going to be about whose going be running the American Empire that no one wants, rather than, is the Empire right or wrong.
Come on lefties.. this is the issue you've been waiting for.
But honestly, all I really want is a sane political leader, for once, and not some goddamned cartoon.
>Because the former is right here and now, and in charge of this country and my future, while the latter is not.
Deal with both for what they are. This is only one world that we are living on.
Note though that while I say that we should not trust the Islamic states as far as we could throw one, that is not the same as saying that we should have a war with them. Far better is to put some form of alternative energy down with them, then unlink ourselves from trade with them, until they decide to at least advance out to the renaissance. For the price of the Iraqi occupation alone, we could be farther along in trying to build a working fusion reactor.
a) The moorish invasion of spain was justifiable to this day by many islamic people on usenet. They argued that spain was backwards and islam helped it. I said see this is why US can invade Iraq, because they are backwards... lol.
b) western christianity and islam are guilty of similar crimes. the egyptian gods were wiped off the map when egypt became an islamic state. western christianity had a reformation though and thus was born the idea that religion is not the ultimate answer to everything and out of that came separation of church and state.
c) there's not even any popular support for church and state separation in the middle east. you think republicans are bad because they want to put god and reagan on everything, just imagine a land where 95% of the people actually think that way, and support things like beheadings for crimes, where women are not allowed to drive, banks not being allowed to charge interest, etc.
Like, if you are suspicious of the American right wing, then how can you not be even trebly suspicious at the islamic right wing, which does daily burn americans in effigy, does daily refer to us as the great satan, etc...?
I just don't understand the logical disconnect. Just because they are not white christians does not mean that they are saints!
Doesn't western music work on a fairly small set of notes coupled by some power of 2 fraction of a second to indicate spacing?
It ought to be possible to write a simple application that creates a random song and copywrites it... distribute it enough, and then, pretty much every song that RIAA publishes would infringe.
Or, depending on how copyright law works, you could programatically generate all possible songs as a single song, and then copywrite that. Then, any new song would infringe upon your song, and the recording industry has to pony up.
The music industry has a problem in that it is a lot easier to programmatically generate music than it is programmatically generate visual arts. If you have computers making music, even randomly, you can pretty much torpedo the notion of intellectual property becuase a brute force generation of notes on a distributed internet will simply outpace the less numerous and less efficient human musicians.
Islam has been trying to take over the world since it was founded. What they are trying to do today is the same thing they were trying to do 300,500, 700, and 1000, even 1250 years ago.
To say that the United States can somehow "win the Islamic people" over is to overlook the fact that in their eyes we are decadent sinners. While we could be nicer to them, that isn't going to help us in the long run. Our destiny in their eyes is to ultimately be converted to Islam.
This might well be the next big thing.
Goggles for gardening. Shows you how deep to cut hole, which branches to prune.
Goggles for repairing things. Car broke down, need to fix breaks? With the goggles you'll be able to do it yourself, no problem.
Goggles for battlefield medicine. Quick, your buddy's arm just got blown off. He's gonna die in minutes and the medics are dead. Put on goggles and at least give it a shot.
Handwriting recognition would have to be good. So you could do stuff have the goggles point out mistakes as you are doing your calculus homework.
Next thing you know, they'll have goggles that make it easier for people to assasinate someone.