In my last living situation we set up a LAN exclusively for the purpose of playing mp3's from the shared directory on the computer in my roomate's room on the laptop sitting right on top of the stereo equipment stack. This was so the laptop could be running Geiss fullscreen so everyone in the living room could enjoy it. There were no latency problems unless my roomate started doing things on his computer in the other room (a P-125).
The only way that the Dell solution would be better than a cable is if the hardware they're putting out has significantly advanced signal quality over your average soundcard - but then why not just get a better soundcard? This product makes no sense at all...
Indeed, the illusion that somehow something as intangible as ideas can have ownership is one of the most irrational developments of contemporary society and could have only been brought about by the most irrational Rationalist system, Capitalism.
However, more laws and more punishments to go with those laws only benefit the strength of the State (and not the corporation) in the end. In order to survive, the State must insure that a criminal class exists - someone to protect "ordinary citizens" from - because without an enemy there is no legitimacy for a Machiavellian State. It makes perfect sense that copyright violators will join the criminal ranks as the State continues the "War on Drugs" and the mostly unmentioned War on the Poor. These changes should be expected and not apprehended; the collective electronic whining of a few thousand liberals from their computer dens won't slow the inevitable corporate/statist steamroller.
I suggest some radical action. Oh, but I guess people are still afraid of that radical label, eh? So I suppose soon I'll be making micropayments for every time I turn on the radio, paying $20 per night for a DVD, and be careful not to mention what's in the secret sauce of a Big Mac for fear of a lawsuit for "reverse engineering".
Not only that, I had to convince the girl I was with that this would be the better one to see. My reasoning: Girls like cartoons (and therefore videogames). I mean, don't they?
After it was over, she said, "Drew Barrymore was in that?!" So I said, "Yeah, but so was Matt Daaa-mon." And she said, "Yeah, duh, like he was that guy who didn't have a clue."
...that's more than enough reason for someone to develop a IM app with 128b encryption. Not to mention the feds listenin in (w/ their own bots). I can just imagine some insipid "public-service bot" that interjects "smoking is sinful" whenever you say "toke", "drag", "square", or "nic-fit".
All this talk of the console makers venturing into the realm of PC's and net-ready appliances raises the question to me, what is it about the console market that makes it so different from the PC market?
Console games are developed with hardware limitations in mind - PC games are just made with arbitrary hardware requirements (RAM needed, minimum playable network ping, etc.). Because of this, you seldom experience problems with your console games (unless your dog has pissed on your PSX more than once) but the latest PC games are infuriatingly unstable (fixable, but who wants to play a game that badly to go thru the trouble?)
In light of this, it makes sense that only one console dominate the market at the time; since all their games are incompatible to each other (but you can emulate all systems on your PC -- haha!) it provides a wide selection of games when one console is in dominance and you have that console.
Now, if someone wants to fix this and have many console makers, then there have to be standards created for making games, like PC's. Once that happens, then what's the point of having consoles? The only alternative IMHO is for Sony to allow OEM's to put together their own, competitive Playstation(2)'s -- there could be more or less expansion slots, different packaging, system tweaks, etc. That is what made VHS destroy Betamax, which is too bad because betamax was a pretty decent format.
I think it's a bit late in the game. After all, Sony already said they were going to this, right? I believe there's a good Ars article on it.
Besides, the Dreamcast has nothing on the Playstation hardware. 20 million polygons vs. 2 million, I believe the comparison is. Sure, the EE is hard to write for, mostly because it's such a radically different way to do 3D graphics -- but because it's such a killer design (at least the hype has said so) and the current status of the Playstation name being so high, I think people would rather develop stuff with the Emotion Engine.
Re:Trying to Stop a Flood with a Bucket and a Towe
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 1
Don't forget about Newsgroups, where I've often downloaded over 1GB of mp3's a day! Well, not often, usually I can only find about 800MB of stuff to get.
..and so on. Though it's not always possible to find exactly what you want (depending on how far back the NNTP server archives stuff), the regular posters on those newsgroups take requests. It's not quite many-to-many like Napster, but you still can get ungodly amounts of music off of it. Sure, it's not as user-friendly but much more egalitarian since famous artists get no more prominance in listing as an unsigned band. I had the entire new Modest Mouse CD (compilation of early 7"'s) four or five months before it was seen in stores.
For a great factual band experience, complete with $$'s and breakdowns - check out http://www.disgraceland.com/there's_this_band.htm its quite enlightening.
Actually, I read this a couple years ago in the Baffler's collection: Commodify Your Dissent. It's an extract of a much longer article by Steve Albini, indie-pop cult icon, or whatever you think of him, I don't care.
However my favorite part of the article is where he starts ragging on the industry types who use the terms "warm" and "punchy" when describing music. Ex: "Yeah, you guys got a good tune down; it's warm, yet punchy..." which is about as meaningless a statement as you can get.
But you're right, my suggestion is a bit oversimplified, however my point wasn't really about challenging the Major Labels' financial emprire, just creating an alternative where a band can be become popular for all the RIGHT reasons, not because the marketeers have posted the image all over town.
Think about it. The "Big 5",as they have been referred to, have been dominating the market for too long. Artists that want to get a national distribution and backing have to sign some pretty crazy contracts with the Major Labels; certain number of concerts within so-and-so amount of time, certain amount of royalties from CD's, certain number of albums, etc. Musicians tend to get shafted with Major Label deals, since people are so eager to "sign up" simply don't look closely enough at their contracts. Sure, for every artist that makes money, 9 other ones don't, but it's not like these Major Labels are struggling because of all the failed bands.
I think it's time for an mp3 giant like MP3.COM to step into the role of Major Record Label - all they need to do is have better, more flexible contracts than the Big Five. Distribution is very cost effective, promotion is garunteed, since they can jsut put it up on their site for people to try out. The millions they make off of advertisements more than pays for a couple hours in the recording studio, plus engineer time to mix it down. Bands pay for their own tours, anyhow. CD's cost about 75¢ to make with a jewelcase, with the insert cost varying widely.
So perhaps the low-cost and low-hype of indie labels can be combined with the wide-distribution and mass-mrket of major labels?
If anyone does anything really wrong, they will be smitten.
"And on the seventh day the Lord created.com,.net, and.org, and it was good. And he saw to it that sovereign domain-abuseers were strook in terror, thus verily did they flee with their loins girded. Yea did those sinners pay their registration fees, and turned thrice in repentence, yog-shaggoth nig-shaggath!"
You are establishing an anarchist state -- No such thing as "anarchist state", but I guess this means we're neighbors, eh?
I have 10 houses and a farm, and like it that way. If you try to move in, you will be shot by me or a member of my familily. -- Well heck, if you're family fills ten houses and a farm...is this one of those farmer w/ 18 daughters jokes?
You can't coexist with me very well, either, because I will out-produce your society, making us even richer compared to you: The people on my compound must work hard for our keep -- Uh, sure you will. And with a functioning anarchist community just next door ready to welcome them anytime "your" people would rather stay under your totalitarian roof? They would rather work harder?
...people in your community will simply live in available houses and eat available food, with no incentive to struggle -- by struggle I take it you mean, "be productive". Sure, lazy people have no business forming an anarchist community and expecting anything out of it. That would be like people complaining about Linux releases and not helping to debug/develop them. The idea is that people are rewarded because they are doing the things they want to do, using skills they are proud of, not for profit/material gain, but because they enjoy the work.
Soon, the more outgoing members of your society will notice how we are living in better conditions due to our relative prosperity, and decide to "sell out". -- Sell out to who? You already said you'd shoot anyone who tried to sleep with your 18 daughters!;)
Seriously, though: the reason why no situation like you describe is going to arise is that once people have enough autonomy to establish alternative socio-political-economic systems, power of prevailing capitalist institutions would have to have been diminished or sidestepped effectively already. So getting there is the problem. I'm sure people would gladly abandon capitalist-bucks for egalitarian-bucks, given the chance.
Distribute the source code: Government must be transparent, otherwise people have no control over the processes that take place.
Dedicated Application Space: If some program crashes, you don't want everything else crashing, too. No program / administration / association should be completely dependent on another. Hence we need a decentralized system.
Fully User-Configurable: On that note, people really ought to be able to choose where their tax money goes. I'd rather take the 25% that funding the military takes and put it into the NEA, for example. Choose what services you want to subscribe to and so forth.
Accept GPL: (this is a stretch, but oh well) The idea of ownable information is outdated and silly -- information can easily be reproduced for all to share, so why not? If goods and services can be easily reproduced for everyone, why should anyone have to pay for it? Yeah, you heard me. Take the motive of profit away from society, and what do you know--no profiteers boosting up the campaigns of trash-talking hucksters to play into the megacorps' deep pockets and sell out the average joe.
Okay, that's about as far as that metaphor will stretch.
...what about building the bridge to the 21st century? I am eagerly awaiting the profound improvements in the educational system our leaders will make by investing in the future of our children and getting tough on crime. I think anyone who wants to hold office should have strong family values and a commitment to upholding democracy. I mean, where would we be without our strong economy and potential for growth? I think the entire world appreciates what we have done to foster a sense of community and understanding between all peoples.
Oh, and don't forget about the Information Superhighway (which has been all but replaced by E-Commerce)
Further to the point, Ronald Reagan wasn't even a lawyer -- he was an actor that hated communism! He had cue cards made for every press briefing with the questions approved ahead of time! Once he answered a question completely off-topic because they had the que-cards mixed up!
The stuff that comes out of a politician's mouth is can't even be used as fertilizer, it's so empty...
Never put one man/woman in charge of everything (oh yeah, "checks and balances" -- yeah, right!) because that's just plain stupid.
Politicians are opportunistic; they will do what they need to do to win. So, the answer to getting them to pony up more information is to make it a necessary component of winning.
The problem with American politics (or all politics, for that matter) is that candidates / parties do not represent actual plans for doing things, they represent opinions. It behooves me to think that a single, overarching ideology could possibly apply to all aspects of human life, which is to say, ridiculous.
Politicians don't go to school and take classes in "Running Everything and Everyone". They're lawyers -- they study rhetoric / argumentation and details of laws so they can quibble, sidestep, and talk endlessly about those laws, but not what they mean. Ronald Reagan didn't understand a damn thing about what was going on -- he just concentrated on getting people to admire him -- so he was a really popular president.
I think we shouldn't have leaders that have ultimate authority on every single issue. Why not elect people who are experts in one field or another, instead? Like elect someone who knows and talks well about water management to be the National Director of Water Resources. We'd elect the person who can demonstrate the most knowledge / expertise on Urban Affairs and Planning to head the Department of Transporation. And so on.
I'm sick of having these individuals (if it's their staff that's keeping them informed on these things -- well I didn't elect the staff, did I?) pretend that they know so much about absolutely everything and that they're informed enough to make decisions on my behalf.
I think Internet technology is jsut the format to drive this direct-democracy, issue-oriented approach to politics. But I guess we're talking about a radical re-invention of the government, which people are just too chicken to get off their couches and pursue...
Re:The real purpose of DeCSS
on
DeCSS Update
·
· Score: 1
The commercial LinuxDVD player will probably be x86, at least at first, which means my iMac running Linux PPC is SOL.
Not necessarily. BeOS installs onto Mac's and it is notoriously easy to port from Linux to BeOS. So you may see a BeDeCSS Player soon. (I know, I know, BeOS isn't exactly open-source, but it's really easy to develop for).
Your letter to Judge Kaplan - a question:
on
DeCSS Update
·
· Score: 2
I commend your action to send a letter to the judge. I hope (since I really have no way of knowing) that other/.'ers are also motivated enough to pursue action (on this and other "issues") of their own, rather than just sitting on it and talking forever.
My question is about the idea of a signatory to the amicus curiae and the effect of writing a letter to a judge. After all, a judge is not supposed to be a politician, right? However it seems that nowadays judges in high-profile cases must consider politics on par with complaints, ordinances, statutes, laws, rights, and constitutions. If not moreso.
I think it has been demnonstrated many times that once people realize that "others are watching" something going on such as a court case, people start to really think about the decisions being made. It's easy to go to work, throw a couple of unknown bums in jail, and throw away the key, but a in a case that's being watched avidly by hundreds, if not thousands?
I encourage people to also write in expressing interest in the case, if not to just let them know that people are paying attention
...is that the single motivating factor to pseudo-innovate (ie. come up with and hype useless crap), maintain market dominance, and create artifially high demand for an overrated product to increase profit margins is the share holder.
But the shareholder isn't even a real person (well, most of MSFT is Bill Gates), in most cases shareholders are transient, disconnected, and usually uninterested in anything other than increasing their portfolio. Who the hell sinks $100,000 into a venture.capitalist.com because they want to improve the standard of living and services available to people? Only a damn fool excuse for an investor.
Real innovations come from people who usually start out not giving a damn about how much money their going to make out of it -- they're usually driven by curiosity and and imagination. Not stock options. People who spend more time thinking about the money they might make off of something tend to fall short of the "innovative" range and end up somewhere in the "marginally improved" area.
My solution? Well, perhaps not one specific to MS, but I would suggest that these companies should be run (in other words, owned) by the people who would be doing the innovation: the developers (and the supporting personnel, of course). Not by shareholders.
But I suppose that would just people too much to ask for, huh, if someone could receive the fair share of profit made from their blood and sweat?
Karel is programmed in Pascal, which in turn is an API done in C. So a good way to proceed is have them master Karel, then program in Pascal, then C, then C++, Perl, Java, etc. My father once tried to teach me ALGOL and COBOL but being mainframe languages they were not very accessible. You can do a lot with just Pascal, however, and anyway the APCS test in highschool I took was in Pascal. After that, they'll either get into by themselves or just kinda lose interest in programming (like I did).
...at the house I lived in with 9 other people and about 8 computers (at college of course), our RJ-45 wires ran outside the house; from the basement windows to the 3rd-floor attic windows, cascading down the central staircase and out the front door, jumping from window to window on the outside, and so forth. (If anyone has been to Virginia Tech, you should know that this was the infamous 205 Kent Street.) And one guy who lived there had 2 ISDN lines and a 3rd phone line installed (for his job), which didn't make things any prettier on the outside, not to mention the couches on the lawn, destroyed bicycle chassis's, car axles, and more cigarette butts than dandelions.
Of course the Town of Blacksburg complained incessantly, but nobody had time to rewire the house--not with 1 to 3 shows (w/ 3-5 live bands each) going on in our living room each week. Man, we played all sorts of network games in the most chaotic, overcrowded, noisy, dirty, smelly, filthy conditions you'd never care to see in your life. I remember waking up in the "server room" (in which the 56k modem connection was shared) one morning after a party, drinker floaters and starting to play networked Syndicate Wars and choking on a cigarette butt while several members of some band I'd never heard of from Oregon dozed on the floor with coils of ethernet and serial cables draped around them.
So if you really really want that geek look, run your wires on the outside! But I wouldn't recommend trying to raise a family there.
If I don't feel like paying $47,000 for a Suburban but instead I could stick it in a magical Xerox machine and copy it for free, would that make it stealing? Would it be wrong?
Slashdot Mirror
Now I'll have to print out all my Natalie Portman skins and paste them on the box!
In my last living situation we set up a LAN exclusively for the purpose of playing mp3's from the shared directory on the computer in my roomate's room on the laptop sitting right on top of the stereo equipment stack. This was so the laptop could be running Geiss fullscreen so everyone in the living room could enjoy it. There were no latency problems unless my roomate started doing things on his computer in the other room (a P-125).
The only way that the Dell solution would be better than a cable is if the hardware they're putting out has significantly advanced signal quality over your average soundcard - but then why not just get a better soundcard? This product makes no sense at all...
But I doubt Big Government and New Legislation is going to stop the propagation and co-option of Corporate Art© for the enjoyment of the many. Any copy-protection can be broken, as can laws. Since when did making something illegal ever stop anyone from doing anything? It jsut drives illegal activities underground.
However, more laws and more punishments to go with those laws only benefit the strength of the State (and not the corporation) in the end. In order to survive, the State must insure that a criminal class exists - someone to protect "ordinary citizens" from - because without an enemy there is no legitimacy for a Machiavellian State. It makes perfect sense that copyright violators will join the criminal ranks as the State continues the "War on Drugs" and the mostly unmentioned War on the Poor. These changes should be expected and not apprehended; the collective electronic whining of a few thousand liberals from their computer dens won't slow the inevitable corporate/statist steamroller.
I suggest some radical action. Oh, but I guess people are still afraid of that radical label, eh? So I suppose soon I'll be making micropayments for every time I turn on the radio, paying $20 per night for a DVD, and be careful not to mention what's in the secret sauce of a Big Mac for fear of a lawsuit for "reverse engineering".
After it was over, she said, "Drew Barrymore was in that?!" So I said, "Yeah, but so was Matt Daaa-mon." And she said, "Yeah, duh, like he was that guy who didn't have a clue."
Actually, I was the guy who didn't have a clue.
...that's more than enough reason for someone to develop a IM app with 128b encryption. Not to mention the feds listenin in (w/ their own bots).
I can just imagine some insipid "public-service bot" that interjects "smoking is sinful" whenever you say "toke", "drag", "square", or "nic-fit".
Console games are developed with hardware limitations in mind - PC games are just made with arbitrary hardware requirements (RAM needed, minimum playable network ping, etc.). Because of this, you seldom experience problems with your console games (unless your dog has pissed on your PSX more than once) but the latest PC games are infuriatingly unstable (fixable, but who wants to play a game that badly to go thru the trouble?)
In light of this, it makes sense that only one console dominate the market at the time; since all their games are incompatible to each other (but you can emulate all systems on your PC -- haha!) it provides a wide selection of games when one console is in dominance and you have that console.
Now, if someone wants to fix this and have many console makers, then there have to be standards created for making games, like PC's. Once that happens, then what's the point of having consoles? The only alternative IMHO is for Sony to allow OEM's to put together their own, competitive Playstation(2)'s -- there could be more or less expansion slots, different packaging, system tweaks, etc. That is what made VHS destroy Betamax, which is too bad because betamax was a pretty decent format.
Besides, the Dreamcast has nothing on the Playstation hardware. 20 million polygons vs. 2 million, I believe the comparison is. Sure, the EE is hard to write for, mostly because it's such a radically different way to do 3D graphics -- but because it's such a killer design (at least the hype has said so) and the current status of the Playstation name being so high, I think people would rather develop stuff with the Emotion Engine.
alt.binaries.music.mp3
alt.binaries.music.mp3.heavy-metal
alt.binaries.music.bootlegs.mp3
Actually, I read this a couple years ago in the Baffler's collection: Commodify Your Dissent. It's an extract of a much longer article by Steve Albini, indie-pop cult icon, or whatever you think of him, I don't care.
However my favorite part of the article is where he starts ragging on the industry types who use the terms "warm" and "punchy" when describing music. Ex: "Yeah, you guys got a good tune down; it's warm, yet punchy..." which is about as meaningless a statement as you can get.
But you're right, my suggestion is a bit oversimplified, however my point wasn't really about challenging the Major Labels' financial emprire, just creating an alternative where a band can be become popular for all the RIGHT reasons, not because the marketeers have posted the image all over town.
I think it's time for an mp3 giant like MP3.COM to step into the role of Major Record Label - all they need to do is have better, more flexible contracts than the Big Five. Distribution is very cost effective, promotion is garunteed, since they can jsut put it up on their site for people to try out. The millions they make off of advertisements more than pays for a couple hours in the recording studio, plus engineer time to mix it down. Bands pay for their own tours, anyhow. CD's cost about 75¢ to make with a jewelcase, with the insert cost varying widely.
So perhaps the low-cost and low-hype of indie labels can be combined with the wide-distribution and mass-mrket of major labels?
If anyone does anything really wrong, they will be smitten.
"And on the seventh day the Lord created .com, .net, and .org, and it was good. And he saw to it that sovereign domain-abuseers were strook in terror, thus verily did they flee with their loins girded. Yea did those sinners pay their registration fees, and turned thrice in repentence, yog-shaggoth nig-shaggath!"
I have 10 houses and a farm, and like it that way. If you try to move in, you will be shot by me or a member of my familily. -- Well heck, if you're family fills ten houses and a farm...is this one of those farmer w/ 18 daughters jokes?
You can't coexist with me very well, either, because I will out-produce your society, making us even richer compared to you: The people on my compound must work hard for our keep -- Uh, sure you will. And with a functioning anarchist community just next door ready to welcome them anytime "your" people would rather stay under your totalitarian roof? They would rather work harder?
Soon, the more outgoing members of your society will notice how we are living in better conditions due to our relative prosperity, and decide to "sell out". -- Sell out to who? You already said you'd shoot anyone who tried to sleep with your 18 daughters! ;)
Seriously, though: the reason why no situation like you describe is going to arise is that once people have enough autonomy to establish alternative socio-political-economic systems, power of prevailing capitalist institutions would have to have been diminished or sidestepped effectively already. So getting there is the problem. I'm sure people would gladly abandon capitalist-bucks for egalitarian-bucks, given the chance.
Distribute the source code: Government must be transparent, otherwise people have no control over the processes that take place.
Dedicated Application Space: If some program crashes, you don't want everything else crashing, too. No program / administration / association should be completely dependent on another. Hence we need a decentralized system.
Fully User-Configurable: On that note, people really ought to be able to choose where their tax money goes. I'd rather take the 25% that funding the military takes and put it into the NEA, for example. Choose what services you want to subscribe to and so forth.
Accept GPL: (this is a stretch, but oh well) The idea of ownable information is outdated and silly -- information can easily be reproduced for all to share, so why not? If goods and services can be easily reproduced for everyone, why should anyone have to pay for it? Yeah, you heard me. Take the motive of profit away from society, and what do you know--no profiteers boosting up the campaigns of trash-talking hucksters to play into the megacorps' deep pockets and sell out the average joe.
Okay, that's about as far as that metaphor will stretch.
Oh, and don't forget about the Information Superhighway (which has been all but replaced by E-Commerce)
The stuff that comes out of a politician's mouth is can't even be used as fertilizer, it's so empty...
Never put one man/woman in charge of everything (oh yeah, "checks and balances" -- yeah, right!) because that's just plain stupid.
The problem with American politics (or all politics, for that matter) is that candidates / parties do not represent actual plans for doing things, they represent opinions. It behooves me to think that a single, overarching ideology could possibly apply to all aspects of human life, which is to say, ridiculous.
Politicians don't go to school and take classes in "Running Everything and Everyone". They're lawyers -- they study rhetoric / argumentation and details of laws so they can quibble, sidestep, and talk endlessly about those laws, but not what they mean. Ronald Reagan didn't understand a damn thing about what was going on -- he just concentrated on getting people to admire him -- so he was a really popular president.
I think we shouldn't have leaders that have ultimate authority on every single issue. Why not elect people who are experts in one field or another, instead? Like elect someone who knows and talks well about water management to be the National Director of Water Resources. We'd elect the person who can demonstrate the most knowledge / expertise on Urban Affairs and Planning to head the Department of Transporation. And so on.
I'm sick of having these individuals (if it's their staff that's keeping them informed on these things -- well I didn't elect the staff, did I?) pretend that they know so much about absolutely everything and that they're informed enough to make decisions on my behalf.
I think Internet technology is jsut the format to drive this direct-democracy, issue-oriented approach to politics. But I guess we're talking about a radical re-invention of the government, which people are just too chicken to get off their couches and pursue...
dot-multimedia-dot-
mp4-dot-sex
Not necessarily. BeOS installs onto Mac's and it is notoriously easy to port from Linux to BeOS. So you may see a BeDeCSS Player soon. (I know, I know, BeOS isn't exactly open-source, but it's really easy to develop for).
My question is about the idea of a signatory to the amicus curiae and the effect of writing a letter to a judge. After all, a judge is not supposed to be a politician, right? However it seems that nowadays judges in high-profile cases must consider politics on par with complaints, ordinances, statutes, laws, rights, and constitutions. If not moreso.
I think it has been demnonstrated many times that once people realize that "others are watching" something going on such as a court case, people start to really think about the decisions being made. It's easy to go to work, throw a couple of unknown bums in jail, and throw away the key, but a in a case that's being watched avidly by hundreds, if not thousands?
I encourage people to also write in expressing interest in the case, if not to just let them know that people are paying attention
. Make 'em lose some sleep.
But the shareholder isn't even a real person (well, most of MSFT is Bill Gates), in most cases shareholders are transient, disconnected, and usually uninterested in anything other than increasing their portfolio. Who the hell sinks $100,000 into a venture.capitalist.com because they want to improve the standard of living and services available to people? Only a damn fool excuse for an investor.
Real innovations come from people who usually start out not giving a damn about how much money their going to make out of it -- they're usually driven by curiosity and and imagination. Not stock options. People who spend more time thinking about the money they might make off of something tend to fall short of the "innovative" range and end up somewhere in the "marginally improved" area.
My solution? Well, perhaps not one specific to MS, but I would suggest that these companies should be run (in other words, owned) by the people who would be doing the innovation: the developers (and the supporting personnel, of course). Not by shareholders.
But I suppose that would just people too much to ask for, huh, if someone could receive the fair share of profit made from their blood and sweat?
Ah! Mindstorms are awesome! There must be a way to combine the KAREL API with Mindstorms to make a physical KAREL, if someone hasn't done it yet.
http://www.mtsu.edu/~untch/karel/ /csc/cs115/web/karel/karel.htm
http://ocweb.otterbein.edu
Karel is programmed in Pascal, which in turn is an API done in C. So a good way to proceed is have them master Karel, then program in Pascal, then C, then C++, Perl, Java, etc. My father once tried to teach me ALGOL and COBOL but being mainframe languages they were not very accessible. You can do a lot with just Pascal, however, and anyway the APCS test in highschool I took was in Pascal. After that, they'll either get into by themselves or just kinda lose interest in programming (like I did).
Of course the Town of Blacksburg complained incessantly, but nobody had time to rewire the house--not with 1 to 3 shows (w/ 3-5 live bands each) going on in our living room each week. Man, we played all sorts of network games in the most chaotic, overcrowded, noisy, dirty, smelly, filthy conditions you'd never care to see in your life. I remember waking up in the "server room" (in which the 56k modem connection was shared) one morning after a party, drinker floaters and starting to play networked Syndicate Wars and choking on a cigarette butt while several members of some band I'd never heard of from Oregon dozed on the floor with coils of ethernet and serial cables draped around them.
So if you really really want that geek look, run your wires on the outside! But I wouldn't recommend trying to raise a family there.
If I don't feel like paying $47,000 for a Suburban but instead I could stick it in a magical Xerox machine and copy it for free, would that make it stealing? Would it be wrong?