Since when does Joe Public compare chips of different architectures? The naming convention is used by the non-computer literate, because traditionally it's been accurate; if you had a Pentium 233, and got a Pentium 333, it was faster. Seemed to work just then. Of course adding Athlons screwed it up a little, but it's still a good, general rule-of-thumb for comparing chip generations.
While her accomplishments may seem minor compared to those of the modern-day programmers,
Actually her accomplishments seem a hell of a lot more important than those of any contemporary programmers. I know slashdotters tend to have messianic complexes, but come on, show some humility; she represents the generation that created the computer revolution.
I don't think that's the correct angle. Yes, companies lose money on pirated software as a whole, but there's no way to pinpoint exactly how much money is lost. It's not a concrete value like a mugging would produce.
No that's NOT the same as stealing. I steal 50 dollars from you, you're out 50 dollars. I copy a program you wrote, you're out nothing. Yes, theoretically I might have bought the program if I couldn't copy it, but that's a lot more abstract than me mugging you and taking your money.
Get over yourselves. Piracy is illegal and tough if you get caught.
Give me a break; this is complete and utter overreaction. The government should kick in doors and confiscate computers over violating COPYRIGHT law? Law enforcement agencies should coordinate raids on an INTERNATIONAL scale? Personally, I don't like to use pirated software, something which my friends consider odd. Yes, it is wrong, but despite what the corporate flacks say, it's not the same as stealing.
Well, it DID have a violently different ecosystem at one point. Repeated exposure to foreign species over the past few hundred years has changed this...
Well, the problem I think is that she cast it in the light of evil-rightist-government vs. poor-indigenous-marxist-rebels she misrepresents the nature of the conflict (which supposedly is really about evil-rightist-government vs. evil-marxist-rebels, with the indigenous people victimized by both).
This sounds like only if the company isn't incorporated the executives can go to jail....Microsoft is incorporated.
The way I read it, if the corporation as an entity refuses to admit wrongdoing and accept a remedy, the executives can be liable for prosecution and jail time, if they're found to have intentionally hidden it from the government.
Actually there's always been people in that category who had no business getting it; Kissinger, Menchu, etc. I think the Nobel committee in a lot of cases uses it to try to influence peace initiatives rather than reward them. To tell the truth, that's probably a better reason to reward them than just as a prize.
Why one bloated PC desktop OS crammed into an embedded computer instead of a different bloated PC desktop OS interface crammed into an embedded computer? Who knows.
Don't laugh: It's not unprecedented, many executives have been sentenced jail time for violating anti-trust laws in the US. Believe me, Gates will cave in in a nanosecond if prison time for him becomes remotely possible.
Well I'm not a libertarian (well, a civil libertarian maybe, which is not the same thing) and I think the government should step in and put their foot on MS's neck. And they should feel free to use my tax dollars to do so.
It looks fine to me; all you have to is read the abstract. This isn't a grand attempt to describe the history of the open source movement, it's a questioning of an assumption that ESR made and most other scholars accepted uncritically (which is why ESR's work is so prominent in the article). He's simply saying that classical economic theory might hold true where ESR and the rest of the OS proponents claim it fails.
In other words, if Linus Torvalds says he does it just for fun, he must be lying because fun is hard for an economist to quantify. Likewise if Eric Raymond says he does it for ego, he must be lying, based on the same reasoning.
That's not what he's saying at all.
As I read it he's criticizing ESR by saying that he tried presenting the rise of the open source movement as an economic theory, when the factors ESR introduces are completely cultural. He also puts forward the completely rational view that too many scholars accept ESR's thesis uncritically. ESR doesn't just say that HE writes software for the ego boost, he says that's the primary goal of ALL hackers. Trying to interpret his criticism of that as an ad-hominem attack just doesn't make sense.
The notion of "gift culture" isn't the author's, it's ESR's [tuxedo.org] (at least as applied to the open source movement).
Too bad ESR didn't really define it very clearly. Not that I have anything against amateur anthropologists, but I don't really think he was qualified to come up with grand cultural theories like that.
If you read the whole thing, he does address that point:
Selecting case studies in an ad hoc fashion is counterproductive. Cases should only be selected which best represent the phenomenon under investigation. In this case - since we are evaluating the empirical validity of challenges to economic theory - the critical projects are those most universally cited as proof of non-economic rationality on the part of developers.
The point wasn't to pick programmers who represent the entire open source movement, but those whose actions (seemingly) contradict contemporary economic theory.
Finally, if you are going to reply to this (e.g. to write the word 'FUD' a lot) then for God's sake, log in! If it's important enough to reply to, then it's worth burning karma on. Karma really isn't that big a deal.
Yep, what's the point of getting karma if you're not going to spend it? For example, I'm posting this at +1, it's going to get modded down at least twice, but who cares?
Slashdot Mirror
uh oh, the tesla fanatics are coming out of the woodwork...
Since when does Joe Public compare chips of different architectures? The naming convention is used by the non-computer literate, because traditionally it's been accurate; if you had a Pentium 233, and got a Pentium 333, it was faster. Seemed to work just then. Of course adding Athlons screwed it up a little, but it's still a good, general rule-of-thumb for comparing chip generations.
While her accomplishments may seem minor compared to those of the modern-day programmers,
Actually her accomplishments seem a hell of a lot more important than those of any contemporary programmers. I know slashdotters tend to have messianic complexes, but come on, show some humility; she represents the generation that created the computer revolution.
I don't think that's the correct angle. Yes, companies lose money on pirated software as a whole, but there's no way to pinpoint exactly how much money is lost. It's not a concrete value like a mugging would produce.
No that's NOT the same as stealing. I steal 50 dollars from you, you're out 50 dollars. I copy a program you wrote, you're out nothing. Yes, theoretically I might have bought the program if I couldn't copy it, but that's a lot more abstract than me mugging you and taking your money.
Get over yourselves. Piracy is illegal and tough if you get caught.
Give me a break; this is complete and utter overreaction. The government should kick in doors and confiscate computers over violating COPYRIGHT law? Law enforcement agencies should coordinate raids on an INTERNATIONAL scale? Personally, I don't like to use pirated software, something which my friends consider odd. Yes, it is wrong, but despite what the corporate flacks say, it's not the same as stealing.
Well, it DID have a violently different ecosystem at one point. Repeated exposure to foreign species over the past few hundred years has changed this...
Yes, I know that sentence wasn't much of a sentence grammatically, but it's late and I'm tired.
Well, the problem I think is that she cast it in the light of evil-rightist-government vs. poor-indigenous-marxist-rebels she misrepresents the nature of the conflict (which supposedly is really about evil-rightist-government vs. evil-marxist-rebels, with the indigenous people victimized by both).
This sounds like only if the company isn't incorporated the executives can go to jail....Microsoft is incorporated.
The way I read it, if the corporation as an entity refuses to admit wrongdoing and accept a remedy, the executives can be liable for prosecution and jail time, if they're found to have intentionally hidden it from the government.
Actually there's always been people in that category who had no business getting it; Kissinger, Menchu, etc. I think the Nobel committee in a lot of cases uses it to try to influence peace initiatives rather than reward them. To tell the truth, that's probably a better reason to reward them than just as a prize.
bullshit. Name 5 executives who were sentenced to jail time for violating antitrust laws.
How about 50? Though that's only from 1999-2000. Here's it broken down over the past decade by number of convictions and time spent in jail.
A little hasty, weren't we.
Why one bloated PC desktop OS crammed into an embedded computer instead of a different bloated PC desktop OS interface crammed into an embedded computer? Who knows.
Here's an idea for a punishment: Jail time.
Don't laugh: It's not unprecedented, many executives have been sentenced jail time for violating anti-trust laws in the US. Believe me, Gates will cave in in a nanosecond if prison time for him becomes remotely possible.
That's irrelevant (and untrue in my opinion; check your phone bill); the law exists at the moment, and it should be enforced.
No its not going too far; it's EXACTLY what anti-trust legislation was intended for.
Well I'm not a libertarian (well, a civil libertarian maybe, which is not the same thing) and I think the government should step in and put their foot on MS's neck. And they should feel free to use my tax dollars to do so.
It looks fine to me; all you have to is read the abstract. This isn't a grand attempt to describe the history of the open source movement, it's a questioning of an assumption that ESR made and most other scholars accepted uncritically (which is why ESR's work is so prominent in the article). He's simply saying that classical economic theory might hold true where ESR and the rest of the OS proponents claim it fails.
In other words, if Linus Torvalds says he does it just for fun, he must be lying because fun is hard for an economist to quantify. Likewise if Eric Raymond says he does it for ego, he must be lying, based on the same reasoning.
That's not what he's saying at all.
As I read it he's criticizing ESR by saying that he tried presenting the rise of the open source movement as an economic theory, when the factors ESR introduces are completely cultural. He also puts forward the completely rational view that too many scholars accept ESR's thesis uncritically. ESR doesn't just say that HE writes software for the ego boost, he says that's the primary goal of ALL hackers. Trying to interpret his criticism of that as an ad-hominem attack just doesn't make sense.
The notion of "gift culture" isn't the author's, it's ESR's [tuxedo.org] (at least as applied to the open source movement).
Too bad ESR didn't really define it very clearly. Not that I have anything against amateur anthropologists, but I don't really think he was qualified to come up with grand cultural theories like that.
You expect good grammar from slashdot editors?
And no, it wasn't a direct quote from the report.
You asked Marcelo about everything from the influence of politics (age and otherwise) to his working enviroment and approach to maintainership
No I didn't.
Why not just enjoy the book? Does EVERY good book HAVE to be made into a movie?
Finally, if you are going to reply to this (e.g. to write the word 'FUD' a lot) then for God's sake, log in! If it's important enough to reply to, then it's worth burning karma on. Karma really isn't that big a deal.
Yep, what's the point of getting karma if you're not going to spend it? For example, I'm posting this at +1, it's going to get modded down at least twice, but who cares?