You're saying that we have here the 21st-century version of an old-school newspaper scoop. (Note to hard-core slashdotizens: a scoop is the news reporters' version of "FR15T P05T!".) The company whose public databases are most rapidly updated to reflect reality can scoop its competition, drawing to itself customers who seek the latest information. (Note to non-native speakers of English: in that sentence, "latest" means "newest." Stupid, I know.) Were I a vice-president at google, I'd create a division that hired aerial photographers after any natural disaster, military attack, industrial accident, etc. solely to ensure that Google Maps stays current. (Note to readers from google.com: reply to this post if you want to hire me to implement this great idea.)
"Free software is a matter of liberty not price. You should think of 'free' as in 'free speech.'"
They want to deny some people Freedom 0, the ability to run the software; never mind viewing or editing the source. I fail to see how curtailing some people's access to software moves the world closer to software freedom for all. This reaction is the sort of thing I expect from the pragmatic OSI folks, not the idealistic FSF folks.
Nope. Supply and demand. Demand goes up, the price goes up. Supply goes down, the price goes up.
The cost of producing the system may go down, but, in the absence of competition, there's no reason for the manufacturer to pass those savings on to customers, and millions of reasons (aka British Pounds) not to.
...cost a fortune each to produce, as did aluminium for the first few years.
Years? More like decades. Discovered in 1825, aluminum (note spelling) was considered a precious metal until better methods of extracting it were developed in the 1880s.
Tongue in cheek it was; this should be obvious to anyone who's visited the city, because they AREN'T better about hiding it. UNtil I visited Washington, D.C. I'd never seen a streetwalker; I'd never seen homeless sleeping in doorways; I'd never seen beggars who seemed to actually need the money to eat. Of all the people I know, only one has been mugged; that happened when they visited DC. All of this happened about 15 blocks north of the National Mall - the White House, the Capitol, the Washington and Lincoln Monuments.
Based on your response and another in this thread, I am thinking that the apalling state of our nation's capital is unknown to most of our nation's citizens.
You are correct about Washington, D.C. in one respect - with a 500,000 inhabitants, it is relatively small. Many Midwestern cities in flyover country (where I live) are larger. Let me share with you some facts about Washington that you are unfamiliar with:
- Poverty is endemic
- Crime is rampant
- The school system that it can't honestly be called an educational system
I was going for oblique sarcasm in my post. Congress has absolute power over the city and the wealth of an entire nation to fund the city, but can't solve ANY social problems. How well will they solve your community's social problems?
Social services *should* be done on a more reasonable level of government, so that you aren't forced, against your will, to pay for them.
Gotta disagree with you there. The Federal government does a MUCH better job with social services than the states ever have. I can demonstrate that with one word and two letters:
Washington D.C.
According the U.S. Constitution, only Congress (or its designees) can govern the capital. It is the only city that has no state or local government to impede the will of the Federal government. Congress bears sole responsibility for the results of all government programs in the city.
Consider those results next time you visit the nation's capital. Observe the lack of poverty and the consequential elimination of homelessness, drug abuse, and crime. Note the rigourous standards in public schools and the resultant high literacy and graduation rates - with such an educational system available to them, no member of Congress bothers to send their children to private schools! It is obvious from even a little reflection that in the city of Washington, Congress has shown the way for state and local governments to address most social ills.
I would encourage everyone reading this to write to their state and local representatives, encouraging them to take a junket to Washington D.C. There, they can observe the results of Congress's decisions and and reconsider state and local policies accordingly. Remember - the more money we give to Congress, and the more control we cede to them, the more our communities will come to resemble Washington, D.C. Who wouldn't want to live in a place like that?
The typical do-gooder isn't doing somethign because it makes him feel good- he's doing it because he thinks he's doing the right thing.
Yes, he will say that, and will tell himself that, but is that the actual root cause of his "do-gooder" behavior? I don't dispute that some people do good out of a desire to do good, but there are others who do it because it makes them feel good. "I am generous. I help people. Others need me." THAT is the internal dialog you want to watch out for.
Clearly the poster understands the phrase "patented technology" better than you do. A patent is not granted unless the technical details are publicly disclosed. You seem to be conflating patents with trade secrets.
But yes, it seems common sense that a company would not disclose the details of their product if they can help it, patent or no patent.
When are we going to finally grow up and realize that not everyone is cut out for college.
As soon as "elitist" isn't a dirty word. As soon as ethnicity-blind policies become the law of the land. As soon as we recognize that homo sapiens is subject to evolutionary pressures and its various subpopulations are variously adapted to their environments.
Any leftist with a lick of political sense is now branding me a racist. Odd how anti-evolution the left becomes when you discuss apply the principles of evolution to the human race.
Golly gee, you mean teh GUBMINT is tracking license plates? Whatever shall we do? The entity that created them is tracking them!
The government has been known to be the problem for thousands of years. The existence of one problem does not undermine the need to prevent the emergence of new problems.
Sadly, the can is open and the worms are everywhere.
Nope. Simply outlaw political speech by corporations. Corporations have no right to free speech guaranteed by the Constitution. Of course, if the wealthy want to put up their personal fortune, then you're right, there's no way to stop it, though you can force them to be open and obvious "I'm A. Wealthyman, and I am personally paying for this message."
Cookies don't track which sites you go to. Right. And guns don't kill people.
The only time they can get this information is if a third party has an Ad, or some other content on both sites Exactly. And the only time a gun is dangerous is when it is loaded and pointed at you.
Your car always has it's license plate, and so they can see who it is. No one tracks license plates. The benefits of tracking them are far outweighed by the costs.
You like visiting well designed websites right? You like candy, don't you, little girl? What I am getting (a well-designed web site) is far outweighed by what I am giving up (all my privacy). Besides, what good is a web designer who can't design a web site without my coerced assistance?
You are being too paranoid....said the ad agency's shill.
What is the differnce between a cookie, and a clerk who recognizes your face?
If the clerk recognizes my face, out of hundreds of customers, then I'm sure I recognize his face, out of a dozen or so clerks. We are on the same footing; in terms of power, we are peers. With cookies, it is 100% different. I don't know what's in the cookies. I don't know how it's used. I don't know who gets the information. In terms of power, I am not a peer. In fact, I am not even a serf, not even a slave, not even chattel. I am a piece of ground to be plowed or burned or planted; I am incapable not only of protesting but of perceiving what is done to me.
This post hath waxed metaphorical....but hopefully you get my point nonetheless.
It should be illegal for an elected official to discuss anything of consequence with anyone other than a constituent. It should be illegal for an elected official to receive ANYTHING from anyone other than a constituent. Is this a severe restriction on our elected officials? You bet it is. If they want the power and the money we provide, they must be willing to accept a few hardships.
Ah. So your theory is that neutron stars don't exist? Or perhaps they merely have no charge? Shoot 500 hydrogen nuclei at a neutron star, and poof! You've got an isotope of element #500.
No, the thing about PI was NOT a hoax. Who told you it was? I can't verify at the moment that it was Indiana, but a bill to set the value of pi at some rational number passed the lower house of the legislature.
True. But his method doesn't scale. If 500 other authors released a book this month for free, sans DRM, it wouldn't be news. If every book was available as a free download, how would the authors make money? Note that the answer is not "How could..." ANYONE can make up guesses and suppositions; ANYONE can decide that the world should work the way they want it to.
The real question is "How do you ensure that most of the rich people make more money when the world has changed in the way you want it to change? And how do you prove that you're correct?" The rich people run things; if you can show them how they'll make more money, they'll do your bidding. if you can't convince them that changing the status quo will make them richer, you'll have to force them to change, either through government intervention, unlikely because the rich people ARE the government, or through force of arms. I don't think you could find many people willing to kill over DRM.
History suggests otherwise. When ancient civilizations discovered other civilizations, did internal feuding stop? Consider the frist century of the USA: the Whiskey Rebellion and the Civil War come to mind. Or consider 19th-century Europe. Did the existence of external enemies cause all German-speaking peoples to unite? Not until late in the 19th century (and the result was the Holocaust uniting is not always good). Italy was similar. Or consider 20th century Africa. The existence of more militarily powerful civilizations outside of Africa in the 20th century had the effect of increasing the intensity and deadliness of war in Africa.
In short, you have a nice theory about human beings doesn't withstand scrutiny unless you believe that human beings will magically change and will no longer behave as they have throughout history.
Eventually, though...if you're willing to concede that it won't happen except on a multi-millenial timescale, then I'll buy it. Yes, eventually, the tendency for war may be bred out of human beings.
Close, but no cigar. A ruler is distinct from a straight edge. What differentiates the two is that the ruler has a ruled (ie periodically marked) edge. A slide rule would denote two ruled edges that slide past each other; it connotes such a device used for transcendental calculations - logarithms, tangents, etc. Now, toss the term "circular" into the mix and you are describing a device that is circular, sliding, ruled, and used for making transcendental calculations. The word you draw attention to - "rule" - still applies because there are periodic markings along the edge. The difference is that the edge is now circular rather than straight.
Slashdot Mirror
You're saying that we have here the 21st-century version of an old-school newspaper scoop. (Note to hard-core slashdotizens: a scoop is the news reporters' version of "FR15T P05T!".) The company whose public databases are most rapidly updated to reflect reality can scoop its competition, drawing to itself customers who seek the latest information. (Note to non-native speakers of English: in that sentence, "latest" means "newest." Stupid, I know.) Were I a vice-president at google, I'd create a division that hired aerial photographers after any natural disaster, military attack, industrial accident, etc. solely to ensure that Google Maps stays current. (Note to readers from google.com: reply to this post if you want to hire me to implement this great idea.)
"Free software is a matter of liberty not price. You should think of 'free' as in 'free speech.'"
They want to deny some people Freedom 0, the ability to run the software; never mind viewing or editing the source. I fail to see how curtailing some people's access to software moves the world closer to software freedom for all. This reaction is the sort of thing I expect from the pragmatic OSI folks, not the idealistic FSF folks.
Nope. Supply and demand. Demand goes up, the price goes up. Supply goes down, the price goes up.
The cost of producing the system may go down, but, in the absence of competition, there's no reason for the manufacturer to pass those savings on to customers, and millions of reasons (aka British Pounds) not to.
...cost a fortune each to produce, as did aluminium for the first few years.
Years? More like decades. Discovered in 1825, aluminum (note spelling) was considered a precious metal until better methods of extracting it were developed in the 1880s.
Tongue in cheek it was; this should be obvious to anyone who's visited the city, because they AREN'T better about hiding it. UNtil I visited Washington, D.C. I'd never seen a streetwalker; I'd never seen homeless sleeping in doorways; I'd never seen beggars who seemed to actually need the money to eat. Of all the people I know, only one has been mugged; that happened when they visited DC. All of this happened about 15 blocks north of the National Mall - the White House, the Capitol, the Washington and Lincoln Monuments.
Based on your response and another in this thread, I am thinking that the apalling state of our nation's capital is unknown to most of our nation's citizens.
You are correct about Washington, D.C. in one respect - with a 500,000 inhabitants, it is relatively small. Many Midwestern cities in flyover country (where I live) are larger. Let me share with you some facts about Washington that you are unfamiliar with:
- Poverty is endemic
- Crime is rampant
- The school system that it can't honestly be called an educational system
I was going for oblique sarcasm in my post. Congress has absolute power over the city and the wealth of an entire nation to fund the city, but can't solve ANY social problems. How well will they solve your community's social problems?
Social services *should* be done on a more reasonable level of government, so that you aren't forced, against your will, to pay for them.
Gotta disagree with you there. The Federal government does a MUCH better job with social services than the states ever have. I can demonstrate that with one word and two letters:
Washington D.C.
According the U.S. Constitution, only Congress (or its designees) can govern the capital. It is the only city that has no state or local government to impede the will of the Federal government. Congress bears sole responsibility for the results of all government programs in the city.
Consider those results next time you visit the nation's capital. Observe the lack of poverty and the consequential elimination of homelessness, drug abuse, and crime. Note the rigourous standards in public schools and the resultant high literacy and graduation rates - with such an educational system available to them, no member of Congress bothers to send their children to private schools! It is obvious from even a little reflection that in the city of Washington, Congress has shown the way for state and local governments to address most social ills.
I would encourage everyone reading this to write to their state and local representatives, encouraging them to take a junket to Washington D.C. There, they can observe the results of Congress's decisions and and reconsider state and local policies accordingly. Remember - the more money we give to Congress, and the more control we cede to them, the more our communities will come to resemble Washington, D.C. Who wouldn't want to live in a place like that?
**Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution.
As a math geek, I only know about free math textbooks.
The typical do-gooder isn't doing somethign because it makes him feel good- he's doing it because he thinks he's doing the right thing.
Yes, he will say that, and will tell himself that, but is that the actual root cause of his "do-gooder" behavior? I don't dispute that some people do good out of a desire to do good, but there are others who do it because it makes them feel good. "I am generous. I help people. Others need me." THAT is the internal dialog you want to watch out for.
Yup. And the Democrats know this. And they will run her ANYWAY.
Clearly the poster understands the phrase "patented technology" better than you do. A patent is not granted unless the technical details are publicly disclosed. You seem to be conflating patents with trade secrets.
But yes, it seems common sense that a company would not disclose the details of their product if they can help it, patent or no patent.
When are we going to finally grow up and realize that not everyone is cut out for college.
As soon as "elitist" isn't a dirty word. As soon as ethnicity-blind policies become the law of the land. As soon as we recognize that homo sapiens is subject to evolutionary pressures and its various subpopulations are variously adapted to their environments.
Any leftist with a lick of political sense is now branding me a racist. Odd how anti-evolution the left becomes when you discuss apply the principles of evolution to the human race.
Golly gee, you mean teh GUBMINT is tracking license plates? Whatever shall we do? The entity that created them is tracking them!
The government has been known to be the problem for thousands of years. The existence of one problem does not undermine the need to prevent the emergence of new problems.
Sadly, the can is open and the worms are everywhere.
Nope. Simply outlaw political speech by corporations. Corporations have no right to free speech guaranteed by the Constitution. Of course, if the wealthy want to put up their personal fortune, then you're right, there's no way to stop it, though you can force them to be open and obvious "I'm A. Wealthyman, and I am personally paying for this message."
Cookies don't track which sites you go to.
...said the ad agency's shill.
Right. And guns don't kill people.
The only time they can get this information is if a third party has an Ad, or some other content on both sites
Exactly. And the only time a gun is dangerous is when it is loaded and pointed at you.
Your car always has it's license plate, and so they can see who it is.
No one tracks license plates. The benefits of tracking them are far outweighed by the costs.
You like visiting well designed websites right?
You like candy, don't you, little girl? What I am getting (a well-designed web site) is far outweighed by what I am giving up (all my privacy). Besides, what good is a web designer who can't design a web site without my coerced assistance?
You are being too paranoid.
What is the differnce between a cookie, and a clerk who recognizes your face?
If the clerk recognizes my face, out of hundreds of customers, then I'm sure I recognize his face, out of a dozen or so clerks. We are on the same footing; in terms of power, we are peers. With cookies, it is 100% different. I don't know what's in the cookies. I don't know how it's used. I don't know who gets the information. In terms of power, I am not a peer. In fact, I am not even a serf, not even a slave, not even chattel. I am a piece of ground to be plowed or burned or planted; I am incapable not only of protesting but of perceiving what is done to me.
This post hath waxed metaphorical....but hopefully you get my point nonetheless.
This is flagged as funny, but it's not.
It should be illegal for an elected official to discuss anything of consequence with anyone other than a constituent. It should be illegal for an elected official to receive ANYTHING from anyone other than a constituent. Is this a severe restriction on our elected officials? You bet it is. If they want the power and the money we provide, they must be willing to accept a few hardships.
Ah. So your theory is that neutron stars don't exist? Or perhaps they merely have no charge? Shoot 500 hydrogen nuclei at a neutron star, and poof! You've got an isotope of element #500.
It's possible to do both; aircraft were used as artillery spotters.
No, the thing about PI was NOT a hoax. Who told you it was? I can't verify at the moment that it was Indiana, but a bill to set the value of pi at some rational number passed the lower house of the legislature.
If an 8-year-old can do it, and you haven't demonstrated that the child is a genius, then a reasonable conclusion is that it is easy.
His method already works.
True. But his method doesn't scale. If 500 other authors released a book this month for free, sans DRM, it wouldn't be news. If every book was available as a free download, how would the authors make money? Note that the answer is not "How could..." ANYONE can make up guesses and suppositions; ANYONE can decide that the world should work the way they want it to.
The real question is "How do you ensure that most of the rich people make more money when the world has changed in the way you want it to change? And how do you prove that you're correct?" The rich people run things; if you can show them how they'll make more money, they'll do your bidding. if you can't convince them that changing the status quo will make them richer, you'll have to force them to change, either through government intervention, unlikely because the rich people ARE the government, or through force of arms. I don't think you could find many people willing to kill over DRM.
History suggests otherwise. When ancient civilizations discovered other civilizations, did internal feuding stop? Consider the frist century of the USA: the Whiskey Rebellion and the Civil War come to mind. Or consider 19th-century Europe. Did the existence of external enemies cause all German-speaking peoples to unite? Not until late in the 19th century (and the result was the Holocaust uniting is not always good). Italy was similar. Or consider 20th century Africa. The existence of more militarily powerful civilizations outside of Africa in the 20th century had the effect of increasing the intensity and deadliness of war in Africa.
In short, you have a nice theory about human beings doesn't withstand scrutiny unless you believe that human beings will magically change and will no longer behave as they have throughout history.
Eventually, though...if you're willing to concede that it won't happen except on a multi-millenial timescale, then I'll buy it. Yes, eventually, the tendency for war may be bred out of human beings.
Close, but no cigar. A ruler is distinct from a straight edge. What differentiates the two is that the ruler has a ruled (ie periodically marked) edge. A slide rule would denote two ruled edges that slide past each other; it connotes such a device used for transcendental calculations - logarithms, tangents, etc. Now, toss the term "circular" into the mix and you are describing a device that is circular, sliding, ruled, and used for making transcendental calculations. The word you draw attention to - "rule" - still applies because there are periodic markings along the edge. The difference is that the edge is now circular rather than straight.
/pedantism
Gotta disagree about the morally right bit. If it's illegal, you report it. If it's not, you shut up. You don't THREATEN.