You are actually suggesting the dominance of the cheapest in the market. I won't disagree with that, but what I'm saying is that when you get as large as Microsoft, you tend to make good friends with a lot of people in the government or you don't stay as large as Microsoft.
The odds are not in your favor either way. A creative career has never been a stable choice, and models that are less dependent upon copyright tend to have more reasonable wealth distribution. Also, it's quite hilarious that you bring up the potential for artists producing non-representative works to please a small powerful group of wealthy people as if we aren't already in a state where that is rampant.
That's an extremely narrow perspective on heroism, and it would likely exclude the winners of many prestigious military medals. Your definition of hero would exclude even Robin Hood, practically an archetypal hero. You are basically speaking of a strict militaristic honor code, which is not something the general public applies to heroes.
What about someone fleeing from China to the US to whistleblow on genocide within the country? Would you think someone not a hero for going somewhere his story would be heard and that he wouldn't be in mortal danger?
Gates isn't exactly neutral on this matter. Companies as big as Microsoft don't happen without close friendships with the government, and those relationships get even closer when the company is let off easy in an anti-trust case. Even if he did support Snowden, he wouldn't be able to publicly state that.
I would connect it to an internal power supply so that it can run without using the power, but have an independent backup power supply so it can run those 7 days in the event of even intentional sabotage.
A jetload of citizens seems to be without a great deal of utility. I would think there are significantly less conspicuous means of getting equal amounts of people. I would speculate that, if the passngers were the intended targets, that it was only a few of them that were important to whatever organization staged this operation.
I would disagree on that matter. For starters, a suicide might be to provide insurance money for one's family (a la Death of a Salesman), or to protect a state secret ( a la every spy-related work with a poison pill or similar device). More realistically, though, someone may be in a great deal of suffering due to an inoperable condition, and one's loved ones would likely feel better knowing that the one they care about isn't suffering anymore.
I would disagree somewhat. I am fairly convinced that most people are born with quite a bit of curiosity, but through excessive rote-centric education, learning becomes a labor instead of a desire. The exceptions are not those with a desire to learn, but rather, those whose drive to learn can survive our education system or is revived later in life are the actual exceptions.
There's a little bit more to it than that. UV is in virtually all normal light sources as well, it's the duration and intensity that are harmful. The reason animals are bothered would seem to be that there is a flashing light of a particular color in the otherwise dark night. You are probably at roughly equal risk if you frequent establishments that use blacklights.
Meaingfully monitoring five million people is going to be very difficult. Perhaps we should re-evaluate what is classified and what jobs need classified status. If you have less people with secrets, it's much easier to keep them.
perhaps, but it is technologically superior to mp3 in virtually all metrics. The lone exception I'm aware of possibly being a trivial difference in CPU usage at certain bitrates.
Someone of undetermined nationality makes a trivial mistake that could have easily been the result of failing to properly edit their submission to account for wording changes between different iterations, and you launch into a nationalistic complaint? All people make mistakes and idiots are plentiful in every country. For example, you are an idiot, and you are apparently from a country that is not the USA.
You also left out the possibiilty that loccal governments are taking TOO MUCH care of roads because with the right conditions, they can get federal funds and create some temporary local jobs.
Congestion is a commonly used in regards to network traffic, and since/. is a technology site, that would be the first assumption for a significant share of the users.
The code could very well be based in a project without so many stupid trade restrictions. For example, let's pretend Linus still lives in Finland, and that he is hosting the git repo in Finland. Red Hat is a major contributor, but the Syrian could have gotten the code from the straight from the source in Finland.
This allows individuals in restricted countries to contribute to greater software quality and security without the perceived drawbacks of having them contribute openly. The sharing of this software is not affected in any meaningful way because it's already FOSS, and the source code would almost certainly be mirrored in another country that is less ridiculous about imports.
People are only secretive about advancements to the extent that the value of keeping it a secret is greater than the cost of keeping it a secret. It's also worth remembering that the people who might draw upon your advancement aren't even necessarily competitors. Most advancements aren't worth trying to actively protect, and many advancements are impractical to try and protect while making money.
As for inventive human beings, I would say it's quite the contrary more often, because they are driven by the puzzle, not the prize. External incentives are actually pretty bad at fostering innovative thought. They provide tunnel vision, which is great for getting someone to rotate a lug over and over all day, but bad for getting someone to engage in anything requiring lateral thinking.
I don't think that the iPhone and Android are the best model for comparison here. iPhone and Android games more or less filled the same niche as Flash games, which were already dominated by free.
You are assuming that nobody will just try and stay ahead of the game and actually take risks. In such a market, if it could even occur, somebody would study the cars as they pass by, hypothesize, test, and beat their monopolistic pricing. You are making the faulty assumption that progress happens by miraculous breakthroughs when the reality is that it's almost always a series of incremental improvements of different parties building on each other.
As long as there's paedophiles they'll be child porn
As long as there's peadophiles they'll be peadophiles who need an outlet. The details of that outlet could change. For example, if there were robots that make suitable sexual partners for humans, the majority of pedophiles would probably stay within that safe territory, especially since children often have bad hygiene and are so tempermental.
Slashdot Mirror
You are actually suggesting the dominance of the cheapest in the market. I won't disagree with that, but what I'm saying is that when you get as large as Microsoft, you tend to make good friends with a lot of people in the government or you don't stay as large as Microsoft.
The odds are not in your favor either way. A creative career has never been a stable choice, and models that are less dependent upon copyright tend to have more reasonable wealth distribution. Also, it's quite hilarious that you bring up the potential for artists producing non-representative works to please a small powerful group of wealthy people as if we aren't already in a state where that is rampant.
It's a great business opportunity. You can sell that land at a high price to gun nuts.
That's an extremely narrow perspective on heroism, and it would likely exclude the winners of many prestigious military medals. Your definition of hero would exclude even Robin Hood, practically an archetypal hero. You are basically speaking of a strict militaristic honor code, which is not something the general public applies to heroes.
What about someone fleeing from China to the US to whistleblow on genocide within the country? Would you think someone not a hero for going somewhere his story would be heard and that he wouldn't be in mortal danger?
Gates isn't exactly neutral on this matter. Companies as big as Microsoft don't happen without close friendships with the government, and those relationships get even closer when the company is let off easy in an anti-trust case. Even if he did support Snowden, he wouldn't be able to publicly state that.
And you end up with a population that's better at auto-erotic asphyxiation.
I would connect it to an internal power supply so that it can run without using the power, but have an independent backup power supply so it can run those 7 days in the event of even intentional sabotage.
A jetload of citizens seems to be without a great deal of utility. I would think there are significantly less conspicuous means of getting equal amounts of people. I would speculate that, if the passngers were the intended targets, that it was only a few of them that were important to whatever organization staged this operation.
I would disagree on that matter. For starters, a suicide might be to provide insurance money for one's family (a la Death of a Salesman), or to protect a state secret ( a la every spy-related work with a poison pill or similar device). More realistically, though, someone may be in a great deal of suffering due to an inoperable condition, and one's loved ones would likely feel better knowing that the one they care about isn't suffering anymore.
I would disagree somewhat. I am fairly convinced that most people are born with quite a bit of curiosity, but through excessive rote-centric education, learning becomes a labor instead of a desire. The exceptions are not those with a desire to learn, but rather, those whose drive to learn can survive our education system or is revived later in life are the actual exceptions.
There's a little bit more to it than that. UV is in virtually all normal light sources as well, it's the duration and intensity that are harmful. The reason animals are bothered would seem to be that there is a flashing light of a particular color in the otherwise dark night. You are probably at roughly equal risk if you frequent establishments that use blacklights.
Foolhardy explorers foolish enough to venture into their domain, of course.
Meaingfully monitoring five million people is going to be very difficult. Perhaps we should re-evaluate what is classified and what jobs need classified status. If you have less people with secrets, it's much easier to keep them.
perhaps, but it is technologically superior to mp3 in virtually all metrics. The lone exception I'm aware of possibly being a trivial difference in CPU usage at certain bitrates.
Someone of undetermined nationality makes a trivial mistake that could have easily been the result of failing to properly edit their submission to account for wording changes between different iterations, and you launch into a nationalistic complaint? All people make mistakes and idiots are plentiful in every country. For example, you are an idiot, and you are apparently from a country that is not the USA.
You also left out the possibiilty that loccal governments are taking TOO MUCH care of roads because with the right conditions, they can get federal funds and create some temporary local jobs.
Congestion is a commonly used in regards to network traffic, and since /. is a technology site, that would be the first assumption for a significant share of the users.
The code could very well be based in a project without so many stupid trade restrictions. For example, let's pretend Linus still lives in Finland, and that he is hosting the git repo in Finland. Red Hat is a major contributor, but the Syrian could have gotten the code from the straight from the source in Finland.
They charge for support contracts. These are contributing developers. There's an enormous difference.
This allows individuals in restricted countries to contribute to greater software quality and security without the perceived drawbacks of having them contribute openly. The sharing of this software is not affected in any meaningful way because it's already FOSS, and the source code would almost certainly be mirrored in another country that is less ridiculous about imports.
People are only secretive about advancements to the extent that the value of keeping it a secret is greater than the cost of keeping it a secret. It's also worth remembering that the people who might draw upon your advancement aren't even necessarily competitors. Most advancements aren't worth trying to actively protect, and many advancements are impractical to try and protect while making money.
As for inventive human beings, I would say it's quite the contrary more often, because they are driven by the puzzle, not the prize. External incentives are actually pretty bad at fostering innovative thought. They provide tunnel vision, which is great for getting someone to rotate a lug over and over all day, but bad for getting someone to engage in anything requiring lateral thinking.
I don't think that the iPhone and Android are the best model for comparison here. iPhone and Android games more or less filled the same niche as Flash games, which were already dominated by free.
You are assuming that nobody will just try and stay ahead of the game and actually take risks. In such a market, if it could even occur, somebody would study the cars as they pass by, hypothesize, test, and beat their monopolistic pricing. You are making the faulty assumption that progress happens by miraculous breakthroughs when the reality is that it's almost always a series of incremental improvements of different parties building on each other.
As long as there's peadophiles they'll be peadophiles who need an outlet. The details of that outlet could change. For example, if there were robots that make suitable sexual partners for humans, the majority of pedophiles would probably stay within that safe territory, especially since children often have bad hygiene and are so tempermental.