New bubble sighted; investors "Dumbstruck"
on
Yahoo buys Flickr
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Or just dumb. This is like watching a train crash in slow motion, for the second time. Blogs don't do anything, they don't matter, they serve no purpose other than to make their writers feel better about themselves (and each other in that great big mutual back-pat that is the blogosphere). In other words: they're just like all those great investments that fuckwits made in the.bomb bubble.
Corrected headline: "Yahoo waves goodbye to pile of cash"
.because we're all qualified IP lawyers who can give you a definitive answer to a difficult and potentially costly problem, which could lose you your job.
It's not difficult: he used someone else's code and now his owners...sorry, bosses want to copyright and patent that code. Guess what: they can't because they don't own it because he didn't write it (at least, not all of it). I can't see where you think there may even be a slight ambiguity: they/he doesn't own the code. End of story.
Brainiac will be looking for a new job soon, I reckon.
n(n-1)/2 links, roughly n^2 How is that roughly n^2?
If you draw the curve of it you find that the rate of increase of the gradient is the same as that for n^2. Another way of looking at it is that the value of the formula is proportional to the square of n, since -1 and 2 are constants. For computing we normally take the most "powerful" factor as the dominant one, particularly if we're interested in what happens when n gets really, REALLY big.
Am I the only one who thinks it's funny that so many of these bots are under the GPL - as if the criminals who use them will care about the finer points of copyright law.
You are forgetting that many of the people involved are retarded. If you look on direct connection networks or even in Usenet groups where things like stolen fonts are traded you won't have to look long to find one fuckwit complaining that one of the archives of pirated material he/she/it put together has been "ripped off" by some other twat on the system despite the fact that moron #1 clearly put a copyright notice on the front of his file!
Intelligence is not an entrance requirement for these networks.
No, the legal system is not broken, the settlement shows that the law worked as it should.
No it didn't. The law pretends that corperations are legal entities when it wants to protect execs from taking responsibility but when a company comes up in court over and over again it doesn't get three-strikes rules or any of that shit you or I would get. Just one more slapped hand. Again. That's not how the law should work.
If Burst accepts the settlement they're authorizing MS to use the code
No, they're accepting that they have to let MS do that or become a company that has no resources other than those needed to fight their case. They look like they would win after a decate or so in court, but maybe they don't want to do that; aybe they're rather get some work done.
I've looked at it and as far as I can see it's just a sort of blog-list. What's the point of that? What's it do for me as a Gnetoo user?
And that guy Ciaran McCreesh isn't a troll, he's a wanker, with his "I'll critise something I don't understand and wind up everyone who does for a laugh" routine. I'm sure we'll see Ciaran stepping up to take Dave Allen's mantel as the world's greatest comedian any day now...Christ, to be a spotty know-it-all again!
Of course they do. Even if a producer is a monopolist, demand still decreases as price increases.
Yes, but that's not a factor in the record industry's pricing. The main objective is control of the market. Reduced sales is, up to a point, something they can live with in order to have that control.
If the industry had wanted to these could have been passed on as savings to the customers while maintaining their own profit margin exactly at the levels they've enjoyed for years. That would have increased sales by reducing prices. But they were more concerned with crushing Internet Radio and P2P networks than increasig sales.
So, where does demand come into that pricing system?
I don't get it how some people are all for FOSS, but they're willing to choose one of the most proprietary hardware platforms available
First of all he was given it for free. That's a price point I'd go with too. Secondly, the PPC is such a better processor than the crap that Intel designed that I am still amazed that anyone uses them if they don't have to. The MacMini has finally brought quality processors within the reach of normal people and I for one hope that this is the beginning of the end for the 80x86 at long, long last.
You are right about repair costs and I hope that X-Box and PS3 will encourage more PPC hardware and a bit of competition. Linux users of course are much freer to pick their hardware than most people.
Unless their bean-counters have taken Econ 101 and know the most basic things about supply and demand.
However, in Econ 301 they learned that running a cartel to fix prices is the best system of all, so that's what they did. Supply and demand have nothing to do with the record industry's prices.
I forgot about the tutorial I promised. It doesn't take checking more than a few sources to find significant differences in the account of the Titanic's sinking.
The point I'm trying to make is that before Cameron's film version there was no issue with the story about the stern: it was simply not accepted by anyone who had studied the event, witness statements were not conflicting on this - onely one four year old said it happened, everyone else didn't. Now, searching on Google does not tell you anything about that, it returns the modern day controversy which is wholely unfounded. The point being that all Google's much-vaunted powers, which is what the story is about, are of no help if it can not tell the difference between wittering idiots and authorative studies when it ranks the pages. This makes the effort they're putting into searching seem rather misguided. In many cases returning the results ordered by date of indexing would be vastly more useful than whatever algorithm they really use, so why bother with it?
The big problem is that many people seem to think Google is a research tool and it just isn't. It's really good at confirming preconcieved notions which are inherent in one's search terms but it is worse than useless for telling you what the important ideas or opinions are in many fields. Fields that have been touched by hollywood are particularly badly mangled by the pagerank system which treats a page about historical event like the Titanic sinking lower than a page about the film simply because people link to it.
Tell me what you want to find and I'll give you a short tutorial on how to find it. Google's not an AI, you know.
I want authority. I think perhaps you've missed the point of my original post. There is so much uninformed yakking about things, mainly in blogs, that Google is no longer of any use to someone looking for even slightly non-trivial information. As an example of what I mean, the Titanic did not break apart on the surface. The idea that it did was about before the film was made but it rested on the testimony of a woman who was four at the time; no one else claimed to have seen the stern actually fall into the sea, with the large wave that would have produced.
Now, look for information on the web about the sinking. How long do you have to look before you find out that information? It is there, but it's burried deep and I doubt that you would find it if you didn't know it was there. And a search engine that only finds things you were expecting is not much use really, is it?
This story should read: "a mid-grade civil servant in the UK's least powerful government department was asked to draw up a list of every possible way of funding the BBC. One of the two dozen or so ideas he and his friends came up with was that a tax covering any device that can display BBC programmes. This suggestion was then ignored by everyone except Rupert Murdoch who put it on the front page of his paper 'The Times' as a way of scaring people who will think this is unfair and therefore the BBC should be scrapped and leave the field to Sky (prop: Mr R. Murdoch)."
90% of the slashdot readers couldn't build an interesting interface if you lives depended on it,
I don't want an interesting interface, I want one that works. That's exactly the distinction 90% of Flash developers don't understand. If you do then good, Flash can be used well, but don't kid yourself that you're the norm.
I wish the torrents stuff were true. Unfortunately, the BBC doesn't actually own the copyrights to much of the material they broadcast - and no-one has worked out a sufficiently robust compensation architecture for Internet replicated programming.
Why does it work for radio, then? Is it just that no one cares that much about radio being up for a week because it's, well, radio?
As a search query comes into the system, it hits a Web server, then is split into chunks of service. One set of index servers contains the index; one set of machines contains one full index. To actually answer a query, Google has to use one complete set of servers. Since that set is replicated as a fail-safe, it also increases throughput, because if one set is busy, a new query can be routed to the next set, which drives down search time per box.
It then returns a random blogger's page that has no useful information. Then you look it up in a book.
This is how it works: if the BBC is producing stuff that competes with SKY's shit, Murdoch's press (Times, Sun etc) say it's unfair that a tax-funded company is competing with their (massively cross-subsidised, non-tax-paying) service.
If the BBC is producing high-quality stuff that appeals to fewer people then Murdoch's press says that it's not giving value for money because no one is watching it.
If the BBC were allowed to work freely then we'd have torrents of their programmes available by now. But that would be "unfair" on poor billionaires who want to charge us every time we watch a program or listen to our music in a different location.
Bottom line is: Murdoch, like all his class, hates competition and wants the BBC closed down as soon as possible. And he has the money to buy the politicians; the hard part is convincing the public, even those that read the crap he spreads over their daily rags.
Wow, it failed once in 77 years of governance. That's a bloody good track record in my books.
Particularly given that the report that started all this was 100% accurate on the important issues (a slight mis-discription of Dr Kelly's job was not a big deal).
You mean apart from almost the entire OO framework,
I take it that you've not tried Java? The OO framework is much more highly developed than C++'s and it is almost like a proper OO system; it bears no comparison with C++'s half-arsed system. It does still suffer from the C type system which is why they've had to graft on the generic programming hack which Smalltalk does not need, but that again derives from the C ancestory rather than anything learned from C++. Any such system of strong typing would have hit the same problem and, I imagine, solved it in the same way. Having said that, the Java implimentation is much better.
the familiarity with using these things in a language with C-style syntax?
That's hardly an argument for having derived from C++ instead of C, is it? Or do you mean to imply that C was an obscure language?
You'd think I liked Java from all of this. I don't. The type system is too big a price to pay but it is materially better than C++, but that's nothing to crow about.
Nor, I imagine, would Java programmers, C# programmers,
I really can't see what C++ has given to Java that it didn't get more directly from C, Smalltalk, and a few other experimental languages. C# I don't know well but it seems the same.
Slashdot Mirror
Corrected headline: "Yahoo waves goodbye to pile of cash"
TWW
The license. If I'm going to do work for Apple and Microsoft, they can damn well pay me or at least give me a copy of the end product.
As to HURD: who ever cared?
TWW
It's not difficult: he used someone else's code and now his owners...sorry, bosses want to copyright and patent that code. Guess what: they can't because they don't own it because he didn't write it (at least, not all of it). I can't see where you think there may even be a slight ambiguity: they/he doesn't own the code. End of story.
Brainiac will be looking for a new job soon, I reckon.
TWW
Since Real Life does not seem to have enough people in it to interest most bloggers, it seems unlikely that Yahoo will find enough to "win".
TWW
If you draw the curve of it you find that the rate of increase of the gradient is the same as that for n^2. Another way of looking at it is that the value of the formula is proportional to the square of n, since -1 and 2 are constants. For computing we normally take the most "powerful" factor as the dominant one, particularly if we're interested in what happens when n gets really, REALLY big.
TWW
You are forgetting that many of the people involved are retarded. If you look on direct connection networks or even in Usenet groups where things like stolen fonts are traded you won't have to look long to find one fuckwit complaining that one of the archives of pirated material he/she/it put together has been "ripped off" by some other twat on the system despite the fact that moron #1 clearly put a copyright notice on the front of his file!
Intelligence is not an entrance requirement for these networks.
TWW
Good point well made.
TWW
Well, he looks like he lives under a bridge...
No it didn't. The law pretends that corperations are legal entities when it wants to protect execs from taking responsibility but when a company comes up in court over and over again it doesn't get three-strikes rules or any of that shit you or I would get. Just one more slapped hand. Again. That's not how the law should work.
If Burst accepts the settlement they're authorizing MS to use the code
No, they're accepting that they have to let MS do that or become a company that has no resources other than those needed to fight their case. They look like they would win after a decate or so in court, but maybe they don't want to do that; aybe they're rather get some work done.
TWW
And that guy Ciaran McCreesh isn't a troll, he's a wanker, with his "I'll critise something I don't understand and wind up everyone who does for a laugh" routine. I'm sure we'll see Ciaran stepping up to take Dave Allen's mantel as the world's greatest comedian any day now...Christ, to be a spotty know-it-all again!
Yes, but that's not a factor in the record industry's pricing. The main objective is control of the market. Reduced sales is, up to a point, something they can live with in order to have that control.
If the industry had wanted to these could have been passed on as savings to the customers while maintaining their own profit margin exactly at the levels they've enjoyed for years. That would have increased sales by reducing prices. But they were more concerned with crushing Internet Radio and P2P networks than increasig sales.
So, where does demand come into that pricing system?
TWW
First of all he was given it for free. That's a price point I'd go with too. Secondly, the PPC is such a better processor than the crap that Intel designed that I am still amazed that anyone uses them if they don't have to. The MacMini has finally brought quality processors within the reach of normal people and I for one hope that this is the beginning of the end for the 80x86 at long, long last.
You are right about repair costs and I hope that X-Box and PS3 will encourage more PPC hardware and a bit of competition. Linux users of course are much freer to pick their hardware than most people.
OS/X I can live without, though.
TWW
However, in Econ 301 they learned that running a cartel to fix prices is the best system of all, so that's what they did. Supply and demand have nothing to do with the record industry's prices.
TWW
The point I'm trying to make is that before Cameron's film version there was no issue with the story about the stern: it was simply not accepted by anyone who had studied the event, witness statements were not conflicting on this - onely one four year old said it happened, everyone else didn't. Now, searching on Google does not tell you anything about that, it returns the modern day controversy which is wholely unfounded. The point being that all Google's much-vaunted powers, which is what the story is about, are of no help if it can not tell the difference between wittering idiots and authorative studies when it ranks the pages. This makes the effort they're putting into searching seem rather misguided. In many cases returning the results ordered by date of indexing would be vastly more useful than whatever algorithm they really use, so why bother with it?
The big problem is that many people seem to think Google is a research tool and it just isn't. It's really good at confirming preconcieved notions which are inherent in one's search terms but it is worse than useless for telling you what the important ideas or opinions are in many fields. Fields that have been touched by hollywood are particularly badly mangled by the pagerank system which treats a page about historical event like the Titanic sinking lower than a page about the film simply because people link to it.
TWW
I want authority. I think perhaps you've missed the point of my original post. There is so much uninformed yakking about things, mainly in blogs, that Google is no longer of any use to someone looking for even slightly non-trivial information. As an example of what I mean, the Titanic did not break apart on the surface. The idea that it did was about before the film was made but it rested on the testimony of a woman who was four at the time; no one else claimed to have seen the stern actually fall into the sea, with the large wave that would have produced.
Now, look for information on the web about the sinking. How long do you have to look before you find out that information? It is there, but it's burried deep and I doubt that you would find it if you didn't know it was there. And a search engine that only finds things you were expecting is not much use really, is it?
TWW
TWW
I don't want an interesting interface, I want one that works. That's exactly the distinction 90% of Flash developers don't understand. If you do then good, Flash can be used well, but don't kid yourself that you're the norm.
TWW
Why does it work for radio, then? Is it just that no one cares that much about radio being up for a week because it's, well, radio?
TWW
Yeah, that's right. I've forgotten how to search. Nothing to do with PageRank being useless.
TWW
It then returns a random blogger's page that has no useful information. Then you look it up in a book.
TWW
If the BBC is producing high-quality stuff that appeals to fewer people then Murdoch's press says that it's not giving value for money because no one is watching it.
If the BBC were allowed to work freely then we'd have torrents of their programmes available by now. But that would be "unfair" on poor billionaires who want to charge us every time we watch a program or listen to our music in a different location.
Bottom line is: Murdoch, like all his class, hates competition and wants the BBC closed down as soon as possible. And he has the money to buy the politicians; the hard part is convincing the public, even those that read the crap he spreads over their daily rags.
Fuck the fucking load of fucking fuckers.
TWW
Particularly given that the report that started all this was 100% accurate on the important issues (a slight mis-discription of Dr Kelly's job was not a big deal).
TWW
You ARE being funny, right?
I take it that you've not tried Java? The OO framework is much more highly developed than C++'s and it is almost like a proper OO system; it bears no comparison with C++'s half-arsed system. It does still suffer from the C type system which is why they've had to graft on the generic programming hack which Smalltalk does not need, but that again derives from the C ancestory rather than anything learned from C++. Any such system of strong typing would have hit the same problem and, I imagine, solved it in the same way. Having said that, the Java implimentation is much better.
the familiarity with using these things in a language with C-style syntax?
That's hardly an argument for having derived from C++ instead of C, is it? Or do you mean to imply that C was an obscure language?
You'd think I liked Java from all of this. I don't. The type system is too big a price to pay but it is materially better than C++, but that's nothing to crow about.
TWW
I really can't see what C++ has given to Java that it didn't get more directly from C, Smalltalk, and a few other experimental languages. C# I don't know well but it seems the same.
TWW