Successful free software projects focus on the needs of those likely to contribute to the projects.
This can obviously be other developers who contribute with patches, but it can also be businesses that contribute to Red Hat Linux by buying an enterprise version of Red Hat Linux, or ordinary net surfers who contribute to Mozilla by using the build-in Google search facilities.
If you want a free software project to become popular, you should try to find a way to make increased popularity turn into increased contributions, like Red Hat and Mozilla did. If not, the project will die out along with your passion for the project.
I see plenty of empirical evidence that proponents of all ideologies believe their ideology is "special", and most seem to believe there are empirical evidence that their ideology is what we are "born with".
Personally I'm a rational empiricist and a long term pragmatist, and I see plenty of evidence that children are neither empiricists, not pragmatists (in any time-frame). They have to learn the hard way that the universe does not bend to their whims (wishing doesn't make true) as part of growing up. In fact, most of them never really accept it deep down and continue to believe in invisible forces who make wishing come true, despite all evidence to the contrary.
I am a programmer and I rely on copyright laws. I don't have the option to tour the world and make money off live shows of programming.
I'm a programmer, and like just about every other profession, I don't rely on copyright laws. Someone has some programming they need done, they pay me to to do it. It is that simple. Really. This is how almost the entire workforce operates, there is no really any reason why programmers should be treated specially.
There is a small minority[*] of programmers who work on mass produced software, where copyright once played a role so share the cost among the consumers. But since there are already free alternatives to most mass produced software, copyright is no longer necessary there.
For the vast majority of programmers, it is simply a question of a minor adjustment to their business model. Get payed upfront for your work, rather than get paid later for the product of your work. It just put you in line with everybody else.
Of course a minor adjustment of the business model can often seem like an impenetrable barrier, as we are creatures of habit.
[*] Outsiders vastly overestimate the size of this minority, as the software most people actually _see_ is mass produced.
Natural settings don't require the same amount of cognitive effort.
A jungle or other wild forest does. It is living in cultivated land (farmland or even managed forests) that requires an unnatural low amount of cognitive effort.
Even the most retarded religious fundamentalist understands that dropping a nuclear bomb on someone who has one, or has a country which has one for a friend, isn't such a bright idea.
For some religious fanatics, it would be a bonus if the other country wiped them out in retaliation, as that would ensure all citizens a free ticket to paradise.
Usually it is not a problem, the people in the top of the hierarchies will tend to be people who are mostly interested in using religion to ensure their own power, and have no hurry to give up earthly delight for paradise. The dangerous time is right after a revolution, where you risk getting people in power who actually believe in the stuff they preach.
A large part of the software and hardware IBM sells is sold as part of (or tied to) a solution. IBM sells you an integrated solution to a computing needs, which consist of hardware, software, and service.
They also sell software alone, but I couldn't find number for that.
I find it appalling that Obama is celebrated because of his skin colour.
If you pay attention, you will notice that it is not Obama that it is celebrated because of his skin color. It is the US society that, with good reason, is celebrated because of Obama's skin color. It is fucking amazing for anyone old enough to remember segregation that the US would elect a mulatto president, and it has forced a lot of people outside the US to readjust our prejudices against Americans.
They already know about this application domain, it can be a huge asset to just throw away. The actual coding is often a minor part of program development.
These guys did, for a different MMO. They did raise 200.000 EUR to buy the remains of the bankrupt company. Their plan was to make the source (for client and server) free. Users would pay for the operations of the servers, development would proceed as any other free software project.
They lost the bid to another company, than run the game in a more traditional way.
Re:Hey, remember when Ender's Game was good?
on
Ender in Exile
·
· Score: 1
You remember right, Anton was gay, but found happiness through repressing his own sexuality and marrying a woman. Card was very clear about it, anyone in doubt should try reading it again.
I actually like the pro-community conservatism that is the carrying theme of just about all Card's books, but in that particular instance he went beyond pro-community conservatism, into anti-humanity religious bigotry.
> I code for a living - I MAKE MONEY for selling the product of my skills.
So do I, but I don't sign any non-compete agreements.
> I also code for fun, because I enjoy doing it. Not often, however, do the two categories overlap...
That is just sad. You spend a quarter of your life on the job, it makes sense to strive hard to find a job you enjoy doing. Even if it pays a bit less.
I hate to admit it, but I occasionally prototype small scientific models in Excel before adding them to my (C++) program, which is kind of an integrated meta model. It is very nice to get instant feedback on changes to parameter values, to get a feel for how the model reacts.
Bounded loops are really not a problem, you just have to make all the steps explicit (each step will be a row in a sheet). It can even be nice to see all the intermediate values.
> Besides, Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, which somehow magically changes all the rules on logical arguments, or something.
Just in case your sarcasm is a cover for ignorance: Having a monopoly in one area limits the amount of tying to other areas you are allowed. The idea is that you are not allowed to use your monopoly in one market, to get an unfair advantage in another market. Probably not relevant in this case.
Do people actually choose between watching a bootleg copy of a movie, and watching it in the theater in the opening weekend?
I'd expect bootleg copies to be in direct competition with dvd's, maybe hurting the value of tv rights, and perhaps even some of the last days the movie is on the big screen when you go there just to watch a movie, rather that a specific movie.
But on the opening weekend? It seems like an entirely different experience.
Slashdot Mirror
Successful free software projects focus on the needs of those likely to contribute to the projects.
This can obviously be other developers who contribute with patches, but it can also be businesses that contribute to Red Hat Linux by buying an enterprise version of Red Hat Linux, or ordinary net surfers who contribute to Mozilla by using the build-in Google search facilities.
If you want a free software project to become popular, you should try to find a way to make increased popularity turn into increased contributions, like Red Hat and Mozilla did. If not, the project will die out along with your passion for the project.
I see plenty of empirical evidence that proponents of all ideologies believe their ideology is "special", and most seem to believe there are empirical evidence that their ideology is what we are "born with".
Personally I'm a rational empiricist and a long term pragmatist, and I see plenty of evidence that children are neither empiricists, not pragmatists (in any time-frame). They have to learn the hard way that the universe does not bend to their whims (wishing doesn't make true) as part of growing up. In fact, most of them never really accept it deep down and continue to believe in invisible forces who make wishing come true, despite all evidence to the contrary.
I am a programmer and I rely on copyright laws. I don't have the option to tour the world and make money off live shows of programming.
I'm a programmer, and like just about every other profession, I don't rely on copyright laws. Someone has some programming they need done, they pay me to to do it. It is that simple. Really. This is how almost the entire workforce operates, there is no really any reason why programmers should be treated specially.
There is a small minority[*] of programmers who work on mass produced software, where copyright once played a role so share the cost among the consumers. But since there are already free alternatives to most mass produced software, copyright is no longer necessary there.
For the vast majority of programmers, it is simply a question of a minor adjustment to their business model. Get payed upfront for your work, rather than get paid later for the product of your work. It just put you in line with everybody else.
Of course a minor adjustment of the business model can often seem like an impenetrable barrier, as we are creatures of habit.
[*] Outsiders vastly overestimate the size of this minority, as the software most people actually _see_ is mass produced.
In terms Americans can understand: Norway is the Puerto Rico of the EU.
As far as I can tell, technology pretty much stagnated in the last 5 years and we are simply seeing rehashes of rehashes of old technology.
I first noticed that 20 years ago.
Natural settings don't require the same amount of cognitive effort.
A jungle or other wild forest does. It is living in cultivated land (farmland or even managed forests) that requires an unnatural low amount of cognitive effort.
Even the most retarded religious fundamentalist understands that dropping a nuclear bomb on someone who has one, or has a country which has one for a friend, isn't such a bright idea.
For some religious fanatics, it would be a bonus if the other country wiped them out in retaliation, as that would ensure all citizens a free ticket to paradise.
Usually it is not a problem, the people in the top of the hierarchies will tend to be people who are mostly interested in using religion to ensure their own power, and have no hurry to give up earthly delight for paradise. The dangerous time is right after a revolution, where you risk getting people in power who actually believe in the stuff they preach.
A large part of the software and hardware IBM sells is sold as part of (or tied to) a solution. IBM sells you an integrated solution to a computing needs, which consist of hardware, software, and service.
They also sell software alone, but I couldn't find number for that.
And just for the fun of it, what other developed western nations have elected a black man to the highest office?
What other developed Western nation has a significant black population?
I was pretty amazed that the French were willing to elect a East-European as president though.
I find it appalling that Obama is celebrated because of his skin colour.
If you pay attention, you will notice that it is not Obama that it is celebrated because of his skin color. It is the US society that, with good reason, is celebrated because of Obama's skin color. It is fucking amazing for anyone old enough to remember segregation that the US would elect a mulatto president, and it has forced a lot of people outside the US to readjust our prejudices against Americans.
Why not come up with a fresh idea?
They already know about this application domain, it can be a huge asset to just throw away. The actual coding is often a minor part of program development.
These guys did, for a different MMO. They did raise 200.000 EUR to buy the remains of the bankrupt company. Their plan was to make the source (for client and server) free. Users would pay for the operations of the servers, development would proceed as any other free software project.
They lost the bid to another company, than run the game in a more traditional way.
You remember right, Anton was gay, but found happiness through repressing his own sexuality and marrying a woman. Card was very clear about it, anyone in doubt should try reading it again.
I actually like the pro-community conservatism that is the carrying theme of just about all Card's books, but in that particular instance he went beyond pro-community conservatism, into anti-humanity religious bigotry.
> Anyone know if Obama &co are clued in on techie issues?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4RRi_ntQc8
I am interested to know if any more is available with the right cmd line whatnot.
http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/spore-
game-discussion/341482-states.html
> I code for a living - I MAKE MONEY for selling the product of my skills.
So do I, but I don't sign any non-compete agreements.
> I also code for fun, because I enjoy doing it. Not often, however, do the two categories overlap...
That is just sad. You spend a quarter of your life on the job, it makes sense to strive hard to find a job you enjoy doing. Even if it pays a bit less.
I hate to admit it, but I occasionally prototype small scientific models in Excel before adding them to my (C++) program, which is kind of an integrated meta model. It is very nice to get instant feedback on changes to parameter values, to get a feel for how the model reacts.
Bounded loops are really not a problem, you just have to make all the steps explicit (each step will be a row in a sheet). It can even be nice to see all the intermediate values.
No-ones complaining because EA wants to make money; they're complaining because they like to milk their customers. Understand?
No. Can you elaborate on the difference?
Unless "milk" is not a metaphor for something else, in that case, please do not elaborate.
> Besides, Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, which somehow magically changes all the rules on logical arguments, or something.
Just in case your sarcasm is a cover for ignorance: Having a monopoly in one area limits the amount of tying to other areas you are allowed. The idea is that you are not allowed to use your monopoly in one market, to get an unfair advantage in another market. Probably not relevant in this case.
> Creationism is not a theory.
Of course it is. Just like "the moon is made of green cheese" is a theory. It may not qualify as a scientific theory though.
> There are plenty of disreputable news sources around, but would their readership be interested in Hugo Chavez's email?
Well, the CIA is kind of a news source, whose very select readership is likely to be interested in any dirt they can put their spin on.
> Think about how much has changed in 30 years with technology.
Well, 30 years ago we were also using Unix. Of course, it was quite different from what we call Unix today.
> Not unless you still think that the MS-DOS system is still useful today, or that Windows 3.1 laptop.
MS-DOS sucked when it came out, so did Windows 3.1. Compared to the the Unix and MacOS versions of the time.
Do people actually choose between watching a bootleg copy of a movie, and watching it in the theater in the opening weekend?
I'd expect bootleg copies to be in direct competition with dvd's, maybe hurting the value of tv rights, and perhaps even some of the last days the movie is on the big screen when you go there just to watch a movie, rather that a specific movie.
But on the opening weekend? It seems like an entirely different experience.
While it is not anonymous, it still hasn't any editor, so it probably won't qualify as a reliable source for the Wikipedia standards.
It is on par with a non-anonymous blog, which doesn't qualify either.
They never said we couldn't promote pedophilia, incest, OR bestiality.
But if we can't encourage animals to have sex with their own offspring, what is the point of writing anything at all?
PS: Animals! Have sex with your own offspring!