My right to do what? Share copyrighted material without the consent of the copyright holder?
What right does this action infringe? Please answer without resorting to slippery slope arguments. If they go after trackers that deal only with legal files, then fine, go for the throat. If they're only going after trackers that deal with at least some files that they have no right to be dealing with, then I fail to see the problem. Perhaps that's my failing, though - feel free to enlighten me.
The information genie is out of the bottle. Business models that rely on the sale of information are doomed.
Then the movie industry is doomed. It costs tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to create a modern feature film. Even if you managed to cut that down by an order of magnitude, that's still millions of dollars you need, up front, to make the film.
How do you propose that money is made, if the film (which is just information) cannot be sold to consumers?
Perhaps they'll wage a similar disinformation campaign to indoctrinate our children to believe in the sacredness of intellectual property
There's a reason why intellectual property is considered important enough to be treated specially - it takes time, effort and quite often money to produce it. Musicians can tour, but what of artists, actors, authors, etc? Would you pay to hear an author read out exercepts of their work?
Even if you would, would you donate a sum of money (say $20) to a fund to have a film made, with little or no guarantee of the quality of that film?
At least with the current system, if you think a film sucks, you don't have to see it. If you had to pay to have the film made, you'd not have that choice; good or bad, you'd already have paid.
Few people question the 'fact' that Microsoft was the first software company, or that Intel invented the microprocessor, or that AOL was the first online service.
And that almost certainly has little or nothing to do with those companies, and everything to do with people's lack of knowledge. People tend to assume that the dominant/only player in any market got to be that way because they got there first and grew quickly.
You show me the press release or advert from any of those companies erroneously claiming to be the first in their market, and I'll eat my keyboard.
it would have been more difficult to move to the next version (forced upgrades)
Forced upgrades? Releasing a new version of a language/API is a "forced" upgrade now? Who's forcing you to upgrade when a new Linux kernel or gcc comes out?
Re:Scary (saracasm)
on
A .Net CPU
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 15.6). Guess I'd better explain then that jobserve.com is a major UK-based jobs web site, catering to a large number of industries. While the jobs advertised are mainly in the UK, they also cover parts of Europe, and have a site dedicated to jobs in Australia. How's that slashcode, better?
Yes, that'll suck for anyone who's currently working with any API it replaces, but that's progress - technology moves on. Besides, the jobs won't disappear overnight, there are still openings for COBOL programmers, for example (there's even a COBOL binding for.net...)
I still don't see the big deal. One of the most frequent criticisms I hear on tech sites of Windows is the cruft that's accumulated due to always maintaining backward compatibility. Surely removing that cruft by removing the backward compatibility would be a good thing?
Not that it'll happen very quickly; there's simply far too much software available using the Win32 API to simply drop support. People would either not upgrade, or (worse) move to an alternative platform.
Why does it seem scary? What do you imagine the chip will do?
It's just a CPU for the.net CLR, that's all, in much the same way as Pentiums and Athlons, etc, are CPUs for x86 code. It's not going to prevent you from running Linux, or reach up and take control of your PC and/or spy on you for Bill.
I know that, but even import duty wouldn't take the price up to anything like what we pay from the UK itms. (Not that paying import duty on a download wouldn't feel completely wrong anyway, of course...)
But the point isn't to use PayPal to buy music from itms, it's to use PayPal to buy music from the American itms.
The UK itms charges around £0.79 per track; at the current exchange rate, that works out as about $1.5, or around 50% more for the same chunk of data. That's why people (in the UK at least) are interested in using PayPal to buy from the US itms - it's a fuckload cheaper.
If they didn't work, or if they tended to provide misleading results when applied properly, why would businesses use them at all?
In my experience, most people use whatever methods appear plausible and support their own prejudices (generally subconsciously). Just because the person is in charge of millions of dollars worth of budgeting doesn't usually change that.
I really don't think many people (let alone most managers) think or care about how accessible their data will be in 50 years time.
I agree with you, but in 50 years time, I'll be retired or dead. Most people simply don't think about things like that in the time frame of "many years from now".
Yes - I was querying his piping the output of find to grep when you can just get find to execute grep for you. I completely agree that running grep over your entire hard drive is never gong to match a proper search app for speed...
I used to be a Physicist, and I'd say that your analysis is valid (and is exactly the sort of thing I've done in the past - quick and dirty calculation to see if something is feasible).
Well, if you want to be pedantic, that's only the fastest that a human has travelled relative to the Earth. We're all hurtling around the Sun at around 67,000mph right now...
That's the one thing I don't like about Firefox - so many useful options are hidden in about:config instead of being in the GUI configuration settings management tool.
I can't surf without tabbed browsing anymore. However, I'm typing this on Firefox 1.0, and there appears to be no find-as-you-type available; I've not seen it in Firefox for the last couple of versions, either. I'm not that fussed though, as I never did think it was much of an improvement over hitting ctrl-f...
I feel the same way about the whole single desktop,
A power toy available from MS and the Nvidia drivers provide multiple desktop support; I've not used a non Nvidia card in years, so I can't comment on other manufacturers, but I'd expect their drivers to offer similar functionality.
single user,
The NT line is multi-user in that users are/can be completely separate. The Server line is truly multi-user in that you can have mulitple users logged on to and using the machine simultaneously.
spyware loaded GUI.
Don't use IE or Outlook/Outlook Express, use a firewall (as you should for any system), and you'll be fine - I have been for the 7+ years that I've owned a PC.
Linux is less susceptible to eploits than Windows, I'll give you that, but a lot of malware requires user intervention to install, and there's nothing that Linux can do to prevent that. Cluesless users will always be a danger to themselves, their PCs and the network, whatever OS they're using. If/when they switch to Linux, so will the malware writers.
in those days, Microsoft was just some company that wrote a lousy OS for IBM.
And then, a while later, there were lots of choices among word processors, spreadsheets, etc., and Microsoft's products were considered inferior knockoffs. But they were the people who wrote that lousy OS for IBM, so the suits bought their products
So, somehow, MS went from "just another player in a competitive OS market" to *the* player. Presumably they didn't do it by exploiting their monopoly (they didn't have one) or huge cash reserves (ditto), so there must be something. Either they were very lucky, a very good business, or had a superior product. Either of the latter two would suggest that there *is* something special about MS.
And so much easier to read on the commute to and from work too. Oh, wait, that would be a paper newspaper...
I agree that online news has many advantages, but don't discount the familiarity and portability of more traditional outlets. TV news channels didn't kill newspapers, radio news didn't kill newspapers, I doubt that the Internet will either, at least until 'net-enabled portables are ubiquitous, cheap and fast.
Slashdot Mirror
My right to do what? Share copyrighted material without the consent of the copyright holder?
What right does this action infringe? Please answer without resorting to slippery slope arguments. If they go after trackers that deal only with legal files, then fine, go for the throat. If they're only going after trackers that deal with at least some files that they have no right to be dealing with, then I fail to see the problem. Perhaps that's my failing, though - feel free to enlighten me.
If I incite someone to shoot someone with a pistol, do I get sued?
The information genie is out of the bottle. Business models that rely on the sale of information are doomed.
Then the movie industry is doomed. It costs tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to create a modern feature film. Even if you managed to cut that down by an order of magnitude, that's still millions of dollars you need, up front, to make the film.
How do you propose that money is made, if the film (which is just information) cannot be sold to consumers?
Perhaps they'll wage a similar disinformation campaign to indoctrinate our children to believe in the sacredness of intellectual property
There's a reason why intellectual property is considered important enough to be treated specially - it takes time, effort and quite often money to produce it. Musicians can tour, but what of artists, actors, authors, etc? Would you pay to hear an author read out exercepts of their work?
Even if you would, would you donate a sum of money (say $20) to a fund to have a film made, with little or no guarantee of the quality of that film?
At least with the current system, if you think a film sucks, you don't have to see it. If you had to pay to have the film made, you'd not have that choice; good or bad, you'd already have paid.
Few people question the 'fact' that Microsoft was the first software company, or that Intel invented the microprocessor, or that AOL was the first online service.
And that almost certainly has little or nothing to do with those companies, and everything to do with people's lack of knowledge. People tend to assume that the dominant/only player in any market got to be that way because they got there first and grew quickly.
You show me the press release or advert from any of those companies erroneously claiming to be the first in their market, and I'll eat my keyboard.
You're right - care to point me in the direction of a (modern, stable) OS that does include such functionality out of the box?
I can't do you Quake4, but how about Quake 2?
(Eactly how much Win32 do you think Quake 4 is going to use anyway?)
it would have been more difficult to move to the next version (forced upgrades)
Forced upgrades? Releasing a new version of a language/API is a "forced" upgrade now? Who's forcing you to upgrade when a new Linux kernel or gcc comes out?
Jobserve seems to disagree with you:
search for ".net", any job type - 1629
search for "c", any job type - 1499
search for "java", any job type - 3009
search for "c++", any job type - 2300
Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 15.6). Guess I'd better explain then that jobserve.com is a major UK-based jobs web site, catering to a large number of industries. While the jobs advertised are mainly in the UK, they also cover parts of Europe, and have a site dedicated to jobs in Australia. How's that slashcode, better?
So?
.net...)
Yes, that'll suck for anyone who's currently working with any API it replaces, but that's progress - technology moves on. Besides, the jobs won't disappear overnight, there are still openings for COBOL programmers, for example (there's even a COBOL binding for
I still don't see the big deal. One of the most frequent criticisms I hear on tech sites of Windows is the cruft that's accumulated due to always maintaining backward compatibility. Surely removing that cruft by removing the backward compatibility would be a good thing?
Not that it'll happen very quickly; there's simply far too much software available using the Win32 API to simply drop support. People would either not upgrade, or (worse) move to an alternative platform.
Why does it seem scary? What do you imagine the chip will do?
.net CLR, that's all, in much the same way as Pentiums and Athlons, etc, are CPUs for x86 code. It's not going to prevent you from running Linux, or reach up and take control of your PC and/or spy on you for Bill.
It's just a CPU for the
I know that, but even import duty wouldn't take the price up to anything like what we pay from the UK itms. (Not that paying import duty on a download wouldn't feel completely wrong anyway, of course...)
But the point isn't to use PayPal to buy music from itms, it's to use PayPal to buy music from the American itms.
The UK itms charges around £0.79 per track; at the current exchange rate, that works out as about $1.5, or around 50% more for the same chunk of data. That's why people (in the UK at least) are interested in using PayPal to buy from the US itms - it's a fuckload cheaper.
If they didn't work, or if they tended to provide misleading results when applied properly, why would businesses use them at all?
In my experience, most people use whatever methods appear plausible and support their own prejudices (generally subconsciously). Just because the person is in charge of millions of dollars worth of budgeting doesn't usually change that.
I really don't think many people (let alone most managers) think or care about how accessible their data will be in 50 years time.
I agree with you, but in 50 years time, I'll be retired or dead. Most people simply don't think about things like that in the time frame of "many years from now".
Are we getting a bit off topic here?
Yes - I was querying his piping the output of find to grep when you can just get find to execute grep for you. I completely agree that running grep over your entire hard drive is never gong to match a proper search app for speed...
So what's wrong with "find / -exec grep junk {} \; -print"? Other than the speed, of course...
I used to be a Physicist, and I'd say that your analysis is valid (and is exactly the sort of thing I've done in the past - quick and dirty calculation to see if something is feasible).
Well, if you want to be pedantic, that's only the fastest that a human has travelled relative to the Earth. We're all hurtling around the Sun at around 67,000mph right now...
That's the one thing I don't like about Firefox - so many useful options are hidden in about:config instead of being in the GUI configuration settings management tool.
I can't surf without tabbed browsing anymore. However, I'm typing this on Firefox 1.0, and there appears to be no find-as-you-type available; I've not seen it in Firefox for the last couple of versions, either. I'm not that fussed though, as I never did think it was much of an improvement over hitting ctrl-f...
I feel the same way about the whole single desktop,
A power toy available from MS and the Nvidia drivers provide multiple desktop support; I've not used a non Nvidia card in years, so I can't comment on other manufacturers, but I'd expect their drivers to offer similar functionality.
single user,
The NT line is multi-user in that users are/can be completely separate. The Server line is truly multi-user in that you can have mulitple users logged on to and using the machine simultaneously.
spyware loaded GUI.
Don't use IE or Outlook/Outlook Express, use a firewall (as you should for any system), and you'll be fine - I have been for the 7+ years that I've owned a PC.
Linux is less susceptible to eploits than Windows, I'll give you that, but a lot of malware requires user intervention to install, and there's nothing that Linux can do to prevent that. Cluesless users will always be a danger to themselves, their PCs and the network, whatever OS they're using. If/when they switch to Linux, so will the malware writers.
How the fuck is he even getting it to run when I removed all access to it!?
Windows key-R, type in "iexplore", hit return?
in those days, Microsoft was just some company that wrote a lousy OS for IBM.
And then, a while later, there were lots of choices among word processors, spreadsheets, etc., and Microsoft's products were considered inferior knockoffs. But they were the people who wrote that lousy OS for IBM, so the suits bought their products
So, somehow, MS went from "just another player in a competitive OS market" to *the* player. Presumably they didn't do it by exploiting their monopoly (they didn't have one) or huge cash reserves (ditto), so there must be something. Either they were very lucky, a very good business, or had a superior product. Either of the latter two would suggest that there *is* something special about MS.
An awful lot of spyware piggybacks on legitimate installs of software you want (think Kazaa), or by social engineering.
And so much easier to read on the commute to and from work too. Oh, wait, that would be a paper newspaper...
I agree that online news has many advantages, but don't discount the familiarity and portability of more traditional outlets. TV news channels didn't kill newspapers, radio news didn't kill newspapers, I doubt that the Internet will either, at least until 'net-enabled portables are ubiquitous, cheap and fast.