So when does it stop being 'opinion' that big companies don't give a shit about anyone else's "IP rights".
When somebody actually proves it. For example, since you're convinced that MS is using a prirated copy of SoundForge, prove it to me now. Prove to me that they didn't simply use some royalty-free/public domain wav files, or buy them from a third party, all obtained in good faith, that the original author used a cracked copy of SoundForge on.
I'm going with the "nothing but greedy hypocrites" thanks
You do that. I'm going with "innocent until proven guilty" thanks; this is circumstancial evidence at best.
You're going to have to explain that, assuming that you don't mean that kg is mass while lb is weight, and so the conversion really requires you to specify the local acceleration due to gravity...
In a way, this shows us the limits of closed source developpement
Well, that, and just how crappy and unpopular the Itanium is. There's no point a company expending effort developing for a platform few people are ever going to use; they develop code to make money, not for the sheer fun of it. That is, it's a job, not a hobby.
If my boss ever gives me shit about showing up late or leaving early because of a sick child I'll hand in my resignation on the spot. Your family is a million times more important then your company.
That's pretty-much my attitude in a nutshell. My first duty is always to my family. In the event of my employer and my family simultaneously having equal need of me, my family wins.
I'm lucky in that that view is pretty-much shared by everyone I work with. That's not to say that we don't work long, hard hours sometimes - of course we do. When neccesary I will work through the night to get someting done in time. I've put in a 24 hour shift or two in the past to get the project finished in time for a deadline, and I'm not the only one.
My dedication to the project, if perhaps not the company, cannot be questioned. Yet I won't think twice before coming in late or working from home if my daughter or girlfriend need me more than the company does.
What kind of hours do you suppose the executives work?
To an extent, that's immaterial. While I guess I'd object less to working stupid hours if I knew that everyone, all the way to the very top, were doing it, at the same time that's not enough justification for making me do so. I have a young daughter, who misses me enough as it is without making me work 70+ hour weeks. It's tolerable, when necessary, for the short term, and especially if it's actually going to be paid. If it starts becoming expected too frequently, then something would have to change, whether that be conditions at the company, or the company I was employed by.
Life's too short to spend it all working to make someone else richer, with little or no benefit to you and your family.
The vast majority of people simply don't know what a program is, what an operating system is, what a CPU is or whatever... The real reason why Firefox is not a threat is because People Are Dumb.
I'm a programmer by trade, and I know all of these things, and I use Firefox. Am I dumb? Apparently not.
I know nothing about motor mechanics; if my car develops a fault, I take it to a garage. Am I dumb now?
I know nothing about building. If I needed an extension built, or a wall knocked through, or whatever, I'd go to a builder. Am I dumb now?
I know nothing about teaching. I may know the subject, but I know nothing about planning and preparing lessons, setting homework, or keeping a class full of students interested and engaged. Am I dumb now?
Because by extending your reasoning to other fields, I am, and so are you, and everyone else here.
People here need to stop being so elitist, and denigrating people just because they know less about computers than some arbitrarily determined minimum level below which the person must be "dumb".
And the watermark is present on the assistive hearing jack; that's the point.
Yes, that was his point too - he *wants* an audio recording with the watermark present, and that's a good way of getting a good quality recording without having to film the entire movie and then split out the audio track.
That was my first thought too. Easy enough to do; they already have the tech to parse your emails and suggest ads based on content. Easy enough to append them to the end of the mail.
That's something I've wondered myself. Now, it's true that the two sets of people (those decrying GPL violations and similar, and those defending infringing copyrights on music and movies and similar) are not identical. However, for each article on each topic, there are a lot of highly-rated posts expressing each of those views, as appropriate. It's hard not to come to the conclusion that the consensus on slashdot is that infringing the GPL = bad, infringing movie/music/etc copyright = okay.
Me, I view all IP rights infringement as bad, unless there are strongly mitigating circumstances (by which I mean, people's lives are on the line), but I do feel myself to be in a minority here at times.
To all those of you reading this and thinking "but there are many views here!" that's true. But just look at the tones of the various articles, and the sorts of comments that get posted in response. Articles about the RIAA and MPAA suing filesharers for copyright violations always have a bias towards that being a bad thing, and yet we have articles taking companies to task for violating the GPL. Well, slashdot, you can't have it both ways, and no, predatory business practices and high prices don't excuse people infringing copyrights.
I think you're misinterpreting that. I read it as meaning that if you distribute the binary without source, then anyone who receives the binary no matter who they receive it from may request the source from you, and you must comply with the request.
That is, if I give you the binary but not the source, then you give the binary to a friend, your friend can ask me for the source. If I give you the binary and the source together, and you give just the binary to a friend, then if your friend asks me for the source, I'm allowed to tell him to ask you for it.
I certainly do not read it as meaning that if you distribute the binary and source seperately, then anyone in the world can demand the source from you. Of course, IANAL, yadda yadda.
"We will indemnify customers against time lost due to exploits found in our own code."
That would be *huge* coming from almost *any* software developer - even the GPL specifically disclaims any warranties concerning fitness for purpose. You generally only get that sort of thing with very expensive bespoke software.
It is too bad that Commercial Enterprise doesn't respect IP Rights.
Bullshit. That's an overly broad generalisation if ever I heard one.
[Disclaimer: the following should not be taken to represent the views of my employer and is purely my own, personal opinion]
The vast majority of "commercial enterprises" that respect IP rights, if only because not doing so can quite easily land you in court. Speaking as a senior programmer paid mostly to create closed-source web apps, I can tell you that I and my colleagues take IP rights issues extremely seriously. We won't even use trial software past the expiration of the trial period, or for commercial purposes (eg working on an actual client project) if the terms forbid it. Why not? We create software for a living. If people don't pay us to write software, we (eventually) don't get paid. Why, then, would I not afford other programmers the same consideration that I ask for? It's called "enlightened self-interest".
Now, I appreciate that there are from time to time stories on here about such and such a company violating the GPL. I'm not saying that no company does so; regrettably, human nature being what it is, there will always be some that do so. However, to say that "commercial enterprise doesn't respect IP rights" is so far from the truth as to be verging on flamebait. Let me put it this way - some open source coders pirate movies, games, etc. Does that mean that I can say that "it's too bad that Open Source Coders don't respect IP Rights"?
Sorry for the pseudo-flame, but this place really needs to tone down the anti-business rhetoric sometimes. Making money isn't automatically evil.
Than you can for rape, or causing death by dangerous driving, etc, then there's something wrong with the justice system.
Re:And Microsoft's incentive would be what, exactl
on
What's Next For Mozilla?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
But what does Dell stand to gain? I don't believe for one second that Firefox comng pre-installed is going to earn then much in the way of extra market share. Meanwhile, pissing MS off enough could be real bad; sure, it might not affect anything *now*, but what about the future? Is there anything to prevent MS from say dropping the price for Longhorn to all major OEMs *except Dell*? It's their product, surely they can sell it to whoever they want at whatever price they see fit? (Serious question - I'm not overly familiar with US anti-trust/monopoly practice law)
Even supposing Dell have nothing to lose, what do they have to gain?
Crackers and hackers always find ways to exploit the code to access or share protected content... The DRM encryption offers the ability for the malware to store content, and without the keys to decode the content, it is hidden from any forensic analysis.
Make up your mind. Which is it? Can the code *always* be exploited to "access or share protected content", or can malware hide itself "from any forensic analysis"?
The point is that the extended warranties are only worth selling because the majority of people won't claim under them. That's because the majority of products will outlast them.
Therefore, most of the time, you're better off saving the money you would've spent on the warranty. No, that money won't buy you a new laptop if yours does break, but the combined saved warranties (assuming you buy a reasonable amount of stuff) might.
Also, I'm not convinced that $300 warranty on a $3000 laptop is entirely realistic; the last time I bought something and a sales guy tried to convince me to buy the extended warranty, the cost was much nearer 25-50% of the purchase price. In fact, in the case of a wasshing machine and tumble drier I bought a couple of years ago, the manufacturer's extended warranty to cover them for a further 5 years cost more than they would have done to buy new. Needless to say, I ignored their offer.
I do think it's short-sighted to simply say that all of these people are obviously stupid, without actually looking at the situation. This is nothing against you personally, but that tends to be the general tone on slashdot and I don't think it's very fair.
I find that that tends to be the general tone on a lot of tech sites on a lot of subjects.
it technically didn't cost anything to SETI themselves
Well, presumably it's a tiny cost compared to that of a true supercomputer, but SETI costs them in bandwidth - both client downloads and updates, and uploading packets of work and downloading processed packets. Even if SETI itself isn't paying for the bandwidth, *someone* is...
Slashdot Mirror
So when does it stop being 'opinion' that big companies don't give a shit about anyone else's "IP rights".
When somebody actually proves it. For example, since you're convinced that MS is using a prirated copy of SoundForge, prove it to me now. Prove to me that they didn't simply use some royalty-free/public domain wav files, or buy them from a third party, all obtained in good faith, that the original author used a cracked copy of SoundForge on.
I'm going with the "nothing but greedy hypocrites" thanks
You do that. I'm going with "innocent until proven guilty" thanks; this is circumstancial evidence at best.
poundage depends on altitude
You're going to have to explain that, assuming that you don't mean that kg is mass while lb is weight, and so the conversion really requires you to specify the local acceleration due to gravity...
In a way, this shows us the limits of closed source developpement
Well, that, and just how crappy and unpopular the Itanium is. There's no point a company expending effort developing for a platform few people are ever going to use; they develop code to make money, not for the sheer fun of it. That is, it's a job, not a hobby.
If my boss ever gives me shit about showing up late or leaving early because of a sick child I'll hand in my resignation on the spot. Your family is a million times more important then your company.
That's pretty-much my attitude in a nutshell. My first duty is always to my family. In the event of my employer and my family simultaneously having equal need of me, my family wins.
I'm lucky in that that view is pretty-much shared by everyone I work with. That's not to say that we don't work long, hard hours sometimes - of course we do. When neccesary I will work through the night to get someting done in time. I've put in a 24 hour shift or two in the past to get the project finished in time for a deadline, and I'm not the only one.
My dedication to the project, if perhaps not the company, cannot be questioned. Yet I won't think twice before coming in late or working from home if my daughter or girlfriend need me more than the company does.
What kind of hours do you suppose the executives work?
To an extent, that's immaterial. While I guess I'd object less to working stupid hours if I knew that everyone, all the way to the very top, were doing it, at the same time that's not enough justification for making me do so. I have a young daughter, who misses me enough as it is without making me work 70+ hour weeks. It's tolerable, when necessary, for the short term, and especially if it's actually going to be paid. If it starts becoming expected too frequently, then something would have to change, whether that be conditions at the company, or the company I was employed by.
Life's too short to spend it all working to make someone else richer, with little or no benefit to you and your family.
The vast majority of people simply don't know what a program is, what an operating system is, what a CPU is or whatever... The real reason why Firefox is not a threat is because People Are Dumb.
I'm a programmer by trade, and I know all of these things, and I use Firefox. Am I dumb? Apparently not.
I know nothing about motor mechanics; if my car develops a fault, I take it to a garage. Am I dumb now?
I know nothing about building. If I needed an extension built, or a wall knocked through, or whatever, I'd go to a builder. Am I dumb now?
I know nothing about teaching. I may know the subject, but I know nothing about planning and preparing lessons, setting homework, or keeping a class full of students interested and engaged. Am I dumb now?
Because by extending your reasoning to other fields, I am, and so are you, and everyone else here.
People here need to stop being so elitist, and denigrating people just because they know less about computers than some arbitrarily determined minimum level below which the person must be "dumb".
And the watermark is present on the assistive hearing jack; that's the point.
Yes, that was his point too - he *wants* an audio recording with the watermark present, and that's a good way of getting a good quality recording without having to film the entire movie and then split out the audio track.
Looks like someone has an axe to grind. Hey, mod me flamebait too for agreeing!
It was a joke.
The 21st century's answer to Communism when it comes to ignoring due process.
That was my first thought too. Easy enough to do; they already have the tech to parse your emails and suggest ads based on content. Easy enough to append them to the end of the mail.
Do you consider yourself above average intelligence?
Probably - most people do. Most of them are wrong, too.
If you are, that means that by definition most (i.e. more than half) of the people you meet are dumber than you.
"Dumber than me" does not equal "incompetent".
That's something I've wondered myself. Now, it's true that the two sets of people (those decrying GPL violations and similar, and those defending infringing copyrights on music and movies and similar) are not identical. However, for each article on each topic, there are a lot of highly-rated posts expressing each of those views, as appropriate. It's hard not to come to the conclusion that the consensus on slashdot is that infringing the GPL = bad, infringing movie/music/etc copyright = okay.
Me, I view all IP rights infringement as bad, unless there are strongly mitigating circumstances (by which I mean, people's lives are on the line), but I do feel myself to be in a minority here at times.
To all those of you reading this and thinking "but there are many views here!" that's true. But just look at the tones of the various articles, and the sorts of comments that get posted in response. Articles about the RIAA and MPAA suing filesharers for copyright violations always have a bias towards that being a bad thing, and yet we have articles taking companies to task for violating the GPL. Well, slashdot, you can't have it both ways, and no, predatory business practices and high prices don't excuse people infringing copyrights.
I think you're misinterpreting that. I read it as meaning that if you distribute the binary without source, then anyone who receives the binary no matter who they receive it from may request the source from you, and you must comply with the request.
That is, if I give you the binary but not the source, then you give the binary to a friend, your friend can ask me for the source. If I give you the binary and the source together, and you give just the binary to a friend, then if your friend asks me for the source, I'm allowed to tell him to ask you for it.
I certainly do not read it as meaning that if you distribute the binary and source seperately, then anyone in the world can demand the source from you. Of course, IANAL, yadda yadda.
"We will indemnify customers against time lost due to exploits found in our own code."
That would be *huge* coming from almost *any* software developer - even the GPL specifically disclaims any warranties concerning fitness for purpose. You generally only get that sort of thing with very expensive bespoke software.
Microsoft is an 800lb gorilla, with an enormous patent stockpile to use againts agressors...
RedHat, or whoever, aren't.
But IBM is.
There needs to be harsh punishment
No there doesn't. There needs to be just, fitting punishment.
It is too bad that Commercial Enterprise doesn't respect IP Rights.
Bullshit. That's an overly broad generalisation if ever I heard one.
[Disclaimer: the following should not be taken to represent the views of my employer and is purely my own, personal opinion]
The vast majority of "commercial enterprises" that respect IP rights, if only because not doing so can quite easily land you in court. Speaking as a senior programmer paid mostly to create closed-source web apps, I can tell you that I and my colleagues take IP rights issues extremely seriously. We won't even use trial software past the expiration of the trial period, or for commercial purposes (eg working on an actual client project) if the terms forbid it. Why not? We create software for a living. If people don't pay us to write software, we (eventually) don't get paid. Why, then, would I not afford other programmers the same consideration that I ask for? It's called "enlightened self-interest".
Now, I appreciate that there are from time to time stories on here about such and such a company violating the GPL. I'm not saying that no company does so; regrettably, human nature being what it is, there will always be some that do so. However, to say that "commercial enterprise doesn't respect IP rights" is so far from the truth as to be verging on flamebait. Let me put it this way - some open source coders pirate movies, games, etc. Does that mean that I can say that "it's too bad that Open Source Coders don't respect IP Rights"?
Sorry for the pseudo-flame, but this place really needs to tone down the anti-business rhetoric sometimes. Making money isn't automatically evil.
Than you can for rape, or causing death by dangerous driving, etc, then there's something wrong with the justice system.
But what does Dell stand to gain? I don't believe for one second that Firefox comng pre-installed is going to earn then much in the way of extra market share. Meanwhile, pissing MS off enough could be real bad; sure, it might not affect anything *now*, but what about the future? Is there anything to prevent MS from say dropping the price for Longhorn to all major OEMs *except Dell*? It's their product, surely they can sell it to whoever they want at whatever price they see fit? (Serious question - I'm not overly familiar with US anti-trust/monopoly practice law)
Even supposing Dell have nothing to lose, what do they have to gain?
Crackers and hackers always find ways to exploit the code to access or share protected content... The DRM encryption offers the ability for the malware to store content, and without the keys to decode the content, it is hidden from any forensic analysis.
Make up your mind. Which is it? Can the code *always* be exploited to "access or share protected content", or can malware hide itself "from any forensic analysis"?
The point is that the extended warranties are only worth selling because the majority of people won't claim under them. That's because the majority of products will outlast them.
Therefore, most of the time, you're better off saving the money you would've spent on the warranty. No, that money won't buy you a new laptop if yours does break, but the combined saved warranties (assuming you buy a reasonable amount of stuff) might.
Also, I'm not convinced that $300 warranty on a $3000 laptop is entirely realistic; the last time I bought something and a sales guy tried to convince me to buy the extended warranty, the cost was much nearer 25-50% of the purchase price. In fact, in the case of a wasshing machine and tumble drier I bought a couple of years ago, the manufacturer's extended warranty to cover them for a further 5 years cost more than they would have done to buy new. Needless to say, I ignored their offer.
I sold it to persue my current career as a software developer... I work for people who apprecate quality work
Please! Take me with you!!!
Agreed. It's not even slow - the page loaded almost instantaneously for me.
I do think it's short-sighted to simply say that all of these people are obviously stupid, without actually looking at the situation. This is nothing against you personally, but that tends to be the general tone on slashdot and I don't think it's very fair.
I find that that tends to be the general tone on a lot of tech sites on a lot of subjects.
it technically didn't cost anything to SETI themselves
Well, presumably it's a tiny cost compared to that of a true supercomputer, but SETI costs them in bandwidth - both client downloads and updates, and uploading packets of work and downloading processed packets. Even if SETI itself isn't paying for the bandwidth, *someone* is...