You claim that "even at possibly the theoretically best efficiency, they cannot generate enough power per square meter than people consume per square meter".
{ahem}
The words "given current technology" are conspicuously missing from your post. Until corporations are given the correct incentives which recognise that future generations matter (despite being unable to vote or pay money), they will continue to underspend on developing technology to improve energy efficiency.
BTW, there is no corporate conspiracy not to improve them just like there isn't a corporate conspiracy not to "break the speed of light" It's called the laws of physics.
Oh yeh? And from which fundamental cosmological principles do you deduce your estimate of "the amount of power consumed by people per square meter"? You patronising prick. Who's this "people"? Chinese peasants? Indian cattle farmers? African subsistence farmers? Or are you, perhaps, referring to the amount of power consumed by the fat, greedy asses of USians, incapable of seeing the connection between ice cream and morbid obesity, let alone between carbon dioxide and global warming.
Listen, you dickhead, you ought to think about the implications of your point. If it's true (which I doubt) that the theoretical maximum amount of energy realisable per square metre is less than that used by humans, then we're fucked. We don't have any other sources of energy that aren't finite. Now what was that I was saying about future generations?
How many factories does Andrew Wiles need to practice his art? How many tons of rare metals? How many foundries? How many labs? How many prototypes? What's the largest project that can be financed out of a Princeton University salary?
Thinking from computer programs to physical objects doesn't really work.
What is wrong with patents on solar panels? Fool. All the civil liberties issues arise with respect to software patents or excessively general business process patents. Patents on physical devices are by their nature limited to the actual technology, and nobody knows of a better way to incentivise development.
Where's the Open Source Solar Panel Initiative? I'll tell you; it's slightly less progressed than the Open Source Natalie Portman Initiative. That at least has a mailing list...
The words "given current technology" are conspicuously missing from your post. Until corporations are given the correct incentives which recognise that future generations matter (despite being unable to vote or pay money), they will continue to underspend on developing technology to improve these methods.
Well, it's not desirable to have people walking the streets with tuberculosis because they're too poor for medical attention or good food. All manner of things aren't desirable, but that doesn't mean that it's acceptable to use government force to prevent them.
And if I'm put through one more needless stripsearch, some airport cop is going to get a metal detector rammed up his ass
Do not, do not, get involved in an ass-ramming contest with an airport cop. They will win, as it were, hands down. They have the experience, the equipment and the facilities.
I wrote the original troll, and believe it or not, it was actually relevant and satirical at the time -- the story was about the proliferation of Gnutella/Freenet type schemes (why the/. crowd seem to love Gnutella when they're clearly ripping off the FSF by pretending to be Gnu when they ain't is beyond me, btw). I am, shall we say, not pleased that my intellectual property (which is mine, btw, as clearly admitted by Slashdot in their disclaimer) is being abused in this way and turned into spam. I've asked Malda et al politely to do something about this abuse, but so far no luck -- I think they don't realise that while Microsoft cares about the bad publicity associated with getting tough, I don't.
In answer to your question, my original half-assed idea would be that, if you'd developed a product after ripping off GPL code, but added proprietary extensions to that code, you might want to distribute your derivative product as freeware, to build up a user base who could then be locked in. But you'd want to do so anonymously, so that the FSF could never prove it was you that had distributed it (proprietary derivative works for internal use are OK). So you could pay a fee to the GPLNet gateway (me) and we'd do your dirty work, untraceably. The revenue model doesn't really work, but nor does FreeNet's.
But the really important point here is the violation of my property rights. I didn't mind this spam in the past, but they've now stolen something that belongs to me. I hold VA Linux, the owner of this site, responsible.
Well, I'm not surprised they didn't show a picture; shall we say that this watch is unlikely to match the aesthetic appeal of a Patek Phillippe? More likely, it'll be like walkingaround with a huge great calculator strapped to your wrist. Linux is never gonna crack the market for educated professionals if it continues to be associated with the proleterian, "NetSlave" market sector
IBM ought to be looking at clever things like the HP calculator initiative. Lots of "Pointy-Haired Bosses" are incipiently tech-savvy, but don't want to show off their skillz for fear of being mistaken for a technical lackey. Anyone who could program the numerical solution algorithm for the Black-Scholes option pricing PDE into a Hewlett-Packard Financial Analyst (and believe me, you won't get through an MBA if you can't) should be able to handle the comparatively trivial installation of Red Hat 6.0. That's the way to go.
Creating nerdy watches so that the junior interns go "I want one" isn't going to sell a single unit of Linux to the people who really generate the sales orders.
Yeah, at least that would mean no more articles by Eric Raymond.... oh, you mean a "hidden agenda" that you don't already agree with. Yeh, let's silence all dissenting opinion, that way we need never learn anything that disconcerts us.
See, well fucking done! You just achieved something that "your friend", Emmett "hung like Robert" Plant couldn't quite get it up for! You just gave us.... a "disclaimer". So now, we can take with, shall we say, a grain of shit, your comment that "I think that attacking Emmett's journalistic integrity is immature" ("immature"!, ye fucking gods! Why not just say that you think it's "gay" or "spastic" if you don't have any arguments!). We can tell that, whatever your views on journalistic ethics, you're probably prepared to prostitute them in order to help out your friend.
Now, if you'd dropped in and said "Hi, I'm Nitrozac, I have no connection to Emmett or anything, I'm just a stuck-up internet loudmouth and censorship advocate with a wholly unrealistic view of "geek" culture. I just took time off from simultaneously patronising and demeaning women by calling them "Techno-Talking Babes in my ludicrously unfunny comic to drop over here and tell the world that, in my considered opinion, "freaking out" over a journalist providing free publicity to his cronies without disclosure is "kinda dumb. Now kiss my ass, and tell me how great you think my boots are." --- then that would be kind of dishonest.
And indeed, given that the context is a story about Internet privacy and "Your Rights Online", am I the only one to think that there is something supremely fucking hypocritical about you daring to raise your square head above the parapet, given that you're the proprietor of a bulletin board which is notorious for censoring contrary opinions and logging IP numbers of anyone who sails by? Though, I doubt that either Slashdot or Interhack will be doing an article on that any time soon.
Please feel free to reply here, or contact me by email, or indeed to do anything that will distract you from drawing another episode of that godawful comic, User Friendly. Before you make the obvious response, I'll point out that I don't read the fucking thing, I just think that you have far to many preteen dittoheads, and anything that reduces their numbers makes the world a less shit place. Not necessarily better, just less horribly shit.
I'm telling you this, Pimp, for your own good. The others are joking, but I'm serious. You are about to give fifty three well-regarded, well-paid individuals the motive, means and opportunity to sue you for a lot of money. And they will want paying in cash, not dot com paper.
I posted that troll, to a thread about Napster-alikes, yesterday. In context, it was quite funny and satirical, I thought. In a completely irrelevant thread, it becomes spam.
Stop using my copyrighted material. Slashdot is not an anonymous network, the content provided above is very clearly owned by me, and you're misusing it.
There is no way you can possibly tell me that rumours and leaks threaten Apple's property.
Balls. "Rumours and leaks" nearly pushed Apple over the edge way back when they were teetering on the brink, and nobody wanted to buy a Mac 'cause they'd heard a rumour about Apple's latest problems. So you can better believe that, these days, when Apple makes you sign an NDA, they mean it
In any case, it's their right to launch their product the way they want. Do you possibly think that trained marketing professionals, capable of selling even a piece of crap like the iBook, might possibly have a better idea of what does and doesn't spoil their launches?
So, this article is terrible, unethical journalism, fit for nothing but flameage.
So what do you call a website that puts up a huge, fuck-off headline saying that a major web-based email provider is about to collapse, then takes it back in a tiny print comment saying "from-the-well-it-could-happen dept"?
Slashdot wants to move out of that glass house before it starts throwing stones.
Anyone who's worked on the slave-ship which was Experian (customer data warehousing company -- seriously expensive Oracle databases, and truly horrific management practices) will occasionally use that one to identify themself to fellow survivors. As in "It was a learning experiance"
No, the revenue model is that we will charge the distributors (Microsoft, etc), who want to get their product out into the public arena as freeware (free as in "beer", in the sense of "the recipe is proprietary"), but who want to rip off bits of GPL code. It's a service for people who want to distribute derivative works without providing source.
Well, for example, if a company had used an open standard like Kerberos, and wanted their embraced and extended standard to be widely used, so that they could later charge a ton?
Who would use it? People who want to download GPL'd binaries without getting the source code
No, people who want to distribute binaries of derivative works of GPL code while maintaining proprietary extensions. I'd charge people for adding a file to the network; companies would want to do this in order to take advantage of GPL code to create proprietary applications.
Well, developers would get hold of GPLd works from their distributors, for free, as per the GPL, then modify them and create "derivative works", and then distribute these derivative works in binary only form, using my system. Clear enough for ya?
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, there is no corporate conspiracy not to improve them just like there isn't a corporate conspiracy not to "break the speed of light" It's called the laws of physics.
Oh yeh? And from which fundamental cosmological principles do you deduce your estimate of "the amount of power consumed by people per square meter"? You patronising prick. Who's this "people"? Chinese peasants? Indian cattle farmers? African subsistence farmers? Or are you, perhaps, referring to the amount of power consumed by the fat, greedy asses of USians, incapable of seeing the connection between ice cream and morbid obesity, let alone between carbon dioxide and global warming.
Listen, you dickhead, you ought to think about the implications of your point. If it's true (which I doubt) that the theoretical maximum amount of energy realisable per square metre is less than that used by humans, then we're fucked. We don't have any other sources of energy that aren't finite. Now what was that I was saying about future generations?
Thinking from computer programs to physical objects doesn't really work.
Where's the Open Source Solar Panel Initiative? I'll tell you; it's slightly less progressed than the Open Source Natalie Portman Initiative. That at least has a mailing list ...
Diminishing returns also apply to oil, you know.
Well, it's not desirable to have people walking the streets with tuberculosis because they're too poor for medical attention or good food. All manner of things aren't desirable, but that doesn't mean that it's acceptable to use government force to prevent them.
I can see why you might want the government to protect against force. But why "fraud"? Caveat Emptor, surely.
Woman repellent?
Do not, do not, get involved in an ass-ramming contest with an airport cop. They will win, as it were, hands down. They have the experience, the equipment and the facilities.
Ok then, learn the hard way for all I care.
In answer to your question, my original half-assed idea would be that, if you'd developed a product after ripping off GPL code, but added proprietary extensions to that code, you might want to distribute your derivative product as freeware, to build up a user base who could then be locked in. But you'd want to do so anonymously, so that the FSF could never prove it was you that had distributed it (proprietary derivative works for internal use are OK). So you could pay a fee to the GPLNet gateway (me) and we'd do your dirty work, untraceably. The revenue model doesn't really work, but nor does FreeNet's.
But the really important point here is the violation of my property rights. I didn't mind this spam in the past, but they've now stolen something that belongs to me. I hold VA Linux, the owner of this site, responsible.
IBM ought to be looking at clever things like the HP calculator initiative. Lots of "Pointy-Haired Bosses" are incipiently tech-savvy, but don't want to show off their skillz for fear of being mistaken for a technical lackey. Anyone who could program the numerical solution algorithm for the Black-Scholes option pricing PDE into a Hewlett-Packard Financial Analyst (and believe me, you won't get through an MBA if you can't) should be able to handle the comparatively trivial installation of Red Hat 6.0. That's the way to go.
Creating nerdy watches so that the junior interns go "I want one" isn't going to sell a single unit of Linux to the people who really generate the sales orders.
No, the "spiralx" brand never trolls. You're thinking of Jon Erikson, who would been in no real position to complain about being bitchslapped.
Yeah, at least that would mean no more articles by Eric Raymond .... oh, you mean a "hidden agenda" that you don't already agree with. Yeh, let's silence all dissenting opinion, that way we need never learn anything that disconcerts us.
See, well fucking done! You just achieved something that "your friend", Emmett "hung like Robert" Plant couldn't quite get it up for! You just gave us .... a "disclaimer". So now, we can take with, shall we say, a grain of shit, your comment that "I think that attacking Emmett's journalistic integrity is immature" ("immature"!, ye fucking gods! Why not just say that you think it's "gay" or "spastic" if you don't have any arguments!). We can tell that, whatever your views on journalistic ethics, you're probably prepared to prostitute them in order to help out your friend.
Now, if you'd dropped in and said "Hi, I'm Nitrozac, I have no connection to Emmett or anything, I'm just a stuck-up internet loudmouth and censorship advocate with a wholly unrealistic view of "geek" culture. I just took time off from simultaneously patronising and demeaning women by calling them "Techno-Talking Babes in my ludicrously unfunny comic to drop over here and tell the world that, in my considered opinion, "freaking out" over a journalist providing free publicity to his cronies without disclosure is "kinda dumb. Now kiss my ass, and tell me how great you think my boots are." --- then that would be kind of dishonest.
And indeed, given that the context is a story about Internet privacy and "Your Rights Online", am I the only one to think that there is something supremely fucking hypocritical about you daring to raise your square head above the parapet, given that you're the proprietor of a bulletin board which is notorious for censoring contrary opinions and logging IP numbers of anyone who sails by? Though, I doubt that either Slashdot or Interhack will be doing an article on that any time soon.
Please feel free to reply here, or contact me by email, or indeed to do anything that will distract you from drawing another episode of that godawful comic, User Friendly. Before you make the obvious response, I'll point out that I don't read the fucking thing, I just think that you have far to many preteen dittoheads, and anything that reduces their numbers makes the world a less shit place. Not necessarily better, just less horribly shit.
In conclusion, fuck yourself.
I'm telling you this, Pimp, for your own good. The others are joking, but I'm serious. You are about to give fifty three well-regarded, well-paid individuals the motive, means and opportunity to sue you for a lot of money. And they will want paying in cash, not dot com paper.
Stop using my copyrighted material. Slashdot is not an anonymous network, the content provided above is very clearly owned by me, and you're misusing it.
Oh yeh, you spelled "fucking" wrong, too.
Balls. "Rumours and leaks" nearly pushed Apple over the edge way back when they were teetering on the brink, and nobody wanted to buy a Mac 'cause they'd heard a rumour about Apple's latest problems. So you can better believe that, these days, when Apple makes you sign an NDA, they mean it
In any case, it's their right to launch their product the way they want. Do you possibly think that trained marketing professionals, capable of selling even a piece of crap like the iBook, might possibly have a better idea of what does and doesn't spoil their launches?
dumbass.
So what do you call a website that puts up a huge, fuck-off headline saying that a major web-based email provider is about to collapse, then takes it back in a tiny print comment saying "from-the-well-it-could-happen dept"?
Slashdot wants to move out of that glass house before it starts throwing stones.
Anyone who's worked on the slave-ship which was Experian (customer data warehousing company -- seriously expensive Oracle databases, and truly horrific management practices) will occasionally use that one to identify themself to fellow survivors. As in "It was a learning experiance"
No, the revenue model is that we will charge the distributors (Microsoft, etc), who want to get their product out into the public arena as freeware (free as in "beer", in the sense of "the recipe is proprietary"), but who want to rip off bits of GPL code. It's a service for people who want to distribute derivative works without providing source.
Well, for example, if a company had used an open standard like Kerberos, and wanted their embraced and extended standard to be widely used, so that they could later charge a ton?
No, people who want to distribute binaries of derivative works of GPL code while maintaining proprietary extensions. I'd charge people for adding a file to the network; companies would want to do this in order to take advantage of GPL code to create proprietary applications.
Since I am a troll myself, this is a game I can only win :-)
Well, developers would get hold of GPLd works from their distributors, for free, as per the GPL, then modify them and create "derivative works", and then distribute these derivative works in binary only form, using my system. Clear enough for ya?