Lose money vs. lose out on money. Big difference there.
Where would Redhat be if most of their paying customers suddenly decided to download their own source and maintain Linux in-house?
Dead, just like any company would die if people stopped using their services. This statement is meaningless. For now, Red Hat provides a valuable service and they make money. They have a business model that bypasses the problems with the normal one.
But copyright also protects authors, illustrators, software developers...
Donations still work in all these cases.
editors, research assistants, printers, services providing hosting and downloading bandwidth, and so on.
Don't most of these make money by charging for their services directly? They could all easily switch to work for non-copyright-based industries like open source stuff, academic research, etc.
Does Slashdot of all places really believe that having eyes on a web site == profit?
There are lots of ways to capitalize on popularity, website ads are among the less significant.
.You can't realistically stop me getting into my car and driving it at your kid at 100mph either.
I don't think you understand the difference here. A guy stealing the car steals on car, he might get away and make $5000 or he might get caught. A single uploader makes the work available to the entire world, and he could easily do it from Somalia instead of the US. It's simply impossible to control free public sharing of information, so there is no point in even trying. There was a time then translating the Bible was considered wrong, the law tried to stop people, the law lost.
If you leave out the pay step in a restaurant, the restaurant loses money. If you leave out the pay step in a software purchase, the software company stays the same, as if you never touched the software at all.
You're repeating the debate the 10001st time already, and the rebuttals are well ironed out:
1) Some people actually want to support the artists. 2) Artists make most of their money from concerts and merchandising anyway. 3) Your song being on www.downloadznork.com increases your popularity and people will be more likely to go to your website, giving you ad revenue. 4) We can't stop copyrighted content from appearing on the public P2P networks days or even hours after it is officially released, and copyright law has to respect this basic technological reality.
It's not a threat to the advanced Office user market, but it is a threat to Microsoft's dominance in the "I want to send a recipe to my friends" type casual users. There's room for both, just like Paint is not a threat to Photoshop but Photoshop is not a threat to Paint.
The president is also the head of many large corporations? That itself should be bolded in 72-point font, to truly show the kind of corruption in Italy.
Judges can think rationally and apply the letter of the law. Jurists, without that to keep them in check, can say "that's immoral, 5 year prison sentence" even if it's not technically illegal. A precise legal framework is needed because you can conform to one, but you can't conform to someone's morality which you don't even know of until the trial.
So 51% of the population has the right to deny 49% the right to engage in perfectly legitimate activities? I wouldn't approve of this even if 90% of the population voted for it.
I was never talking about making everyone love the country and not attack it. I was talking about militarily defeating people hiding in caves and among civilians. The first is impossible no matter what strategy you use, my whole point is that the second is quite doable. The idea that everyone who doesn't like that the hypothetical country killed millions of people and does something about it automatically joins the "guerrilla army" stretches the concept quite far.
I don't think our unemployed workers have the capacity to make up for what China is producing for us now. With the current (highly abnormal) 10% unemployment rate, we have about 15 million unemployed people. Paying them minimum wage gives $150 million an hour, multiply that by 2000 hours/year gives $225 billion per year. So if all the unemployed workers were somehow marshalled to the job, we'll still have 30% less than the $338 billion annual imports from China. And that's just labor cost. To match demand, we'll have to cannibalize our other industries.
There are other benefits to having trade with China. It discourages conflict and encourages better political relations. It allows Chinese workers to lead a better life and ultimately those efforts will pay back to the rest of the world.
I think patriotism and a bit of extra unemployment is a pretty small cost to pay for all this.
Given how Chrome, at least on Linux, is doing everything it needs to do just fine (quite well actually) I always wonder why it's not an official release yet.
Bruce Schneier gets the jokes in the Voynich manuscript. Bruce Schneier can determine if a program terminates just by looking at it. And then the program terminates itself. Bruce Schneier once decrypted a box of AlphaBits. Most people use passwords. Some people use passphrases. Bruce Schneier uses an epic passpoem, detailing the life and works of seven mythical Norse heroes. Bruce Schneier knows Alice and Bob's shared secret. Bruce Schneier can read captchas. Bruce Schneier's password has so much entropy, that gzipping it results in a stream sixty four times as long. And yet he can type it with a single roundhouse kick to the keyboard. Bruce Schneier knows Chuck Norris's private key.
Some are smart, but most are dumb. They can get through airport security just fine, but they don't really think past the moment of grabbing the bomb from their purse and shouting "Allah Akbhar" (even though that tends to make people notice you 5-10 seconds earlier). 24-style terrorist masterminds are a myth.
Slashdot Mirror
The next kernel update will make it 4096 servers per admin. But still no full screen Flash support, though.
Administrators! Administrators! Administrators!
And a technician, since a chair just obliterated one of our motherboards.
How old your mom is.
the software company loses money there too
Lose money vs. lose out on money. Big difference there.
Where would Redhat be if most of their paying customers suddenly decided to download their own source and maintain Linux in-house?
Dead, just like any company would die if people stopped using their services. This statement is meaningless. For now, Red Hat provides a valuable service and they make money. They have a business model that bypasses the problems with the normal one.
Because "word processing == Microsoft Office" is hopelessly ingrained into many people's heads.
But copyright also protects authors, illustrators, software developers...
Donations still work in all these cases.
editors, research assistants, printers, services providing hosting and downloading bandwidth, and so on.
Don't most of these make money by charging for their services directly? They could all easily switch to work for non-copyright-based industries like open source stuff, academic research, etc.
Does Slashdot of all places really believe that having eyes on a web site == profit?
There are lots of ways to capitalize on popularity, website ads are among the less significant.
.You can't realistically stop me getting into my car and driving it at your kid at 100mph either.
I don't think you understand the difference here. A guy stealing the car steals on car, he might get away and make $5000 or he might get caught. A single uploader makes the work available to the entire world, and he could easily do it from Somalia instead of the US. It's simply impossible to control free public sharing of information, so there is no point in even trying. There was a time then translating the Bible was considered wrong, the law tried to stop people, the law lost.
Open source has support contracts too. I'm pretty sure that's how the big open source companies make most of their money.
And that's why we have extensions. Putting everything in at the start just creates bloat.
If you leave out the pay step in a restaurant, the restaurant loses money. If you leave out the pay step in a software purchase, the software company stays the same, as if you never touched the software at all.
You're repeating the debate the 10001st time already, and the rebuttals are well ironed out:
1) Some people actually want to support the artists.
2) Artists make most of their money from concerts and merchandising anyway.
3) Your song being on www.downloadznork.com increases your popularity and people will be more likely to go to your website, giving you ad revenue.
4) We can't stop copyrighted content from appearing on the public P2P networks days or even hours after it is officially released, and copyright law has to respect this basic technological reality.
It's not a threat to the advanced Office user market, but it is a threat to Microsoft's dominance in the "I want to send a recipe to my friends" type casual users. There's room for both, just like Paint is not a threat to Photoshop but Photoshop is not a threat to Paint.
Like IronPython?
99% of people couldn't care less for the advanced features in anything.
The president is also the head of many large corporations? That itself should be bolded in 72-point font, to truly show the kind of corruption in Italy.
Minor correction: I meant jurors, not jurists
Judges can think rationally and apply the letter of the law. Jurists, without that to keep them in check, can say "that's immoral, 5 year prison sentence" even if it's not technically illegal. A precise legal framework is needed because you can conform to one, but you can't conform to someone's morality which you don't even know of until the trial.
The one 5 versions before that, DNA, was actually pretty good.
The idea that what the people want matters is a value judgement. The idea that violent regime changes are bad is a value judgement.
So 51% of the population has the right to deny 49% the right to engage in perfectly legitimate activities? I wouldn't approve of this even if 90% of the population voted for it.
I was never talking about making everyone love the country and not attack it. I was talking about militarily defeating people hiding in caves and among civilians. The first is impossible no matter what strategy you use, my whole point is that the second is quite doable. The idea that everyone who doesn't like that the hypothetical country killed millions of people and does something about it automatically joins the "guerrilla army" stretches the concept quite far.
I don't think our unemployed workers have the capacity to make up for what China is producing for us now. With the current (highly abnormal) 10% unemployment rate, we have about 15 million unemployed people. Paying them minimum wage gives $150 million an hour, multiply that by 2000 hours/year gives $225 billion per year. So if all the unemployed workers were somehow marshalled to the job, we'll still have 30% less than the $338 billion annual imports from China. And that's just labor cost. To match demand, we'll have to cannibalize our other industries.
There are other benefits to having trade with China. It discourages conflict and encourages better political relations. It allows Chinese workers to lead a better life and ultimately those efforts will pay back to the rest of the world.
I think patriotism and a bit of extra unemployment is a pretty small cost to pay for all this.
Dead people can't blow themselves up in airports.
Given how Chrome, at least on Linux, is doing everything it needs to do just fine (quite well actually) I always wonder why it's not an official release yet.
Bruce Schneier gets the jokes in the Voynich manuscript.
Bruce Schneier can determine if a program terminates just by looking at it. And then the program terminates itself.
Bruce Schneier once decrypted a box of AlphaBits.
Most people use passwords. Some people use passphrases. Bruce Schneier uses an epic passpoem, detailing the life and works of seven mythical Norse heroes.
Bruce Schneier knows Alice and Bob's shared secret.
Bruce Schneier can read captchas.
Bruce Schneier's password has so much entropy, that gzipping it results in a stream sixty four times as long. And yet he can type it with a single roundhouse kick to the keyboard.
Bruce Schneier knows Chuck Norris's private key.
Some are smart, but most are dumb. They can get through airport security just fine, but they don't really think past the moment of grabbing the bomb from their purse and shouting "Allah Akbhar" (even though that tends to make people notice you 5-10 seconds earlier). 24-style terrorist masterminds are a myth.